In 2013, the WIV collected animal samples from which they identified the bat coronavirus RaTG13, which is 96.2 percent similar to the COVID-19 virus. By 2018, the WIV had sequenced almost all of RaTG13, which is the second closest known whole genome match to SARS-CoV-2, after BANAL-52, which is 96.8 percent similar. Neither of these viruses is close enough to SARS-CoV-2 to be a direct progenitor.
And:
We assess that some scientists at the WIV have genetically engineered coronaviruses using common laboratory practices. The IC has no information, however, indicating that any WIV genetic engineering work has involved SARS-CoV-2, a close progenitor, or a backbone virus that is closely-related enough to have been the source of the pandemic.
And:
Several WIV researchers were ill in Fall 2019 with symptoms; some of their symptoms were consistent with but not diagnostic of COVID-19. The IC continues to assess that this information neither supports nor refutes either hypothesis of the pandemic’s origins because the researchers’ symptoms could have been caused by a number of diseases and some of the symptoms were not consistent with COVID-19. Consistent with standard practices, those researchers likely completed annual health exams as part of their duties in a highcontainment biosafety laboratory. The IC assesses that the WIV maintains blood samples and health records of all of their laboratory personnel—which are standard procedures in highcontainment laboratories.
• We have no indications that any of these researchers were hospitalized because of the symptoms consistent with COVID-19. One researcher may have been hospitalized in this timeframe for treatment of a non-respiratory medical condition.
• China’s National Security Commission investigated the WIV in early 2020 and took blood samples from WIV researchers. According to the World Health Organization's March 2021 public report, WIV officials including Shi Zhengli—who leads the WIV laboratory group that conducts coronavirus research—stated lab employee samples all tested negative for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies.
Your hero, the boffin you proudly cite, went from privately saying this:
“I really can’t think of a plausible natural scenario . . . . I just can’t figure out how this [Coronavirus] gets accomplished in nature . . . . Of course, in the lab it would be easy . ."
To publicly publishing this, just 48 hours later:
"However, since we observed all notable SARS-CoV-2 features, including the optimized RBD and polybasic cleavage site, in related coronaviruses in nature, we do not believe that any type of laboratory-based scenario is plausible."
Bravo, bravo
I think the Rothschilds are to blame for Covid.
On the contrary, it is obviously space aliens from outer space
Fool. Where do you think the Rothschilds come from?
How could I have been so foolish! It all makes sense now!
Exactly. It’s *always* Woke Trans Gay Illegal Immigrant Alien AIs.
"A striking still-life fresco resembling a pizza has been found among the ruins of ancient Pompeii... and includes one item that looks suspiciously like a pineapple."
I mean this is just bread with chocolate spread (and a few random toppings). Not my cup of tea but a combo enjoyed by millions the world over at breakfast each day.
I’d be interested to see a ‘what if Tories were still led by Boris’ version of this polling.
You could certainly add some that 9% RefUK total to the Tories then
...and even more of that 26% Tory total to the LDs and Labour.
Labour maybe, the lib dems will not end up on anymore seats than they currently get
You think the LDs will end up with just 12 or so seats?
Now, I'm pretty LibDemsceptic, but even I think they're going to make gains. Simply, if the LD vote is largely flat on 2019, while the Conservative vote is down (say) five percentage points, they'll win a couple.
I'd say Cheltenham, Winchester, and Guilford all look highly vulnerable to them, and all have seen the LDs surge at the local level.
"A striking still-life fresco resembling a pizza has been found among the ruins of ancient Pompeii... and includes one item that looks suspiciously like a pineapple."
Did you bother to even read that article before you posted it?
"Fish fingers are still a good way to get the wary to eat fish. After Birds Eye developed fish fingers, it created the tagline “no bones, no waste, no smell, no fuss” and that still holds. So what else is in there? Nothing too odd, it seems."
"A striking still-life fresco resembling a pizza has been found among the ruins of ancient Pompeii... and includes one item that looks suspiciously like a pineapple."
1) cut cod or haddock into finger sized pieces. 2) wisk a whole egg or 2 - put the fish in bowl and make sure they are well coated. 3) roll in some good, coarse, breadcrumbs. Set the rolled pieces out on a board, while you… 4) heat frying pan with a good layer of vegetable oil at the bottom - a mm or 2, not a pond 5) when it is good and hot, start frying. 6) turn after a couple of minutes. BBQ tongs are awesome for this.
"the absence of evidence for a lab leak, and in the presence of evidence for the market as the source" is mere fantasy. To believe it you have to believe that circumstantial evidence is conclusive in favour of the market and inadmissible in favour of the lab, and to ignore the huge debate about whether the furin cleavage site is likely to have arisen in nature.
The evidence for the market is not circumstantial. The early cases were clustered around the market. Environmental analyses found the virus in the market. That there were two initial strains of SARS-COV-2 is consistent with a reservoir of infected animals in the market.
It is, if course, entirely possible for the wet market to be both the focal point, and it to have been a lab leak.
That., of course, it almost certainly what happened. Leaked in the lab - the CDC more likely than the WIV - simply because of proximity - 300 metres away. Infected but pre-symptomatic lab worker went from the CDC to the market to buy a chicken. Bingo. Superspreader event, clustered around the market
It's not obvious to me.
Wild -> lab -> market is plausible and you assert that the wild -> lab bit was happening (and I have no reason to disbelieve this) but the lab -> market bit still requires some lapses that are fairly rare and the timing has to be just right (they do happen, it is certainly possible)
Wild -> market is also plausible and while you assert that wild -> animal in market is unlikely (and again I have no reason to disbelieve) there's also potential for a chain of transmission through animals (or containers, surfaces, air) to market or even indeed a person infected elsewhere (not from lab, closer to large populations of bats) taking it to the market.
I don't see a strong reason to favour one of those over the other, on the available evidence.
If the outbreak had happened in any other city in China, then a purely zoonotic origin would be the most likely scenario. That it happened in the same city where bat diseases were being actively studied skews the probabilities the other way around.
Most large Chinese cities have labs studying coronaviruses. If you're worried about zoonotic infections in China, you're looking at bat diseases. So, if the outbreak had happened in any other city in China, there's a high chance there would have been a similar lab.
This doesn't seem to be true. The number of BSL-4 labs in China is very small.
And a lab leak can come from a BSL-3 lab. After all, WCDC is not BSL-4 lab, and that's the one Leon is most animated about. If it was artificially manipulated, then the odds change. If it was a natural sample leaked (which is where the focus now lies), then it's any BSL-3 lab or higher.
(Edited - BSL-3)
The CDC was, I believe, operating at BSL 2
That's why Jeremy Farrar's first reaction, on hearing about Covid, was that the lab work in China was "like the Wild West". He also believed it probably came from the lab
Yet weirdly enough about six minutes after writing that email he signed a letter to the Lancet calling "lab leak" a baseless conspiracy theory
Funny, huh
Proof that some of this terrifying bat research was done at BSL2 level (I reckon this is the Wuhan CDC they are talking about)
"In EHA-led work conducted in Wuhan, scientists infected humanized mice with engineered novel bat coronaviruses in a BSL-3 facility, according to grant documents EHA submitted to the NIH. Some collection and engineering of bat coronaviruses were done in a BSL-2, with less stringent protocols and containment, according to multiple sources including a paper in the Journal of Virology ."
I always find it's good to look at the home page of any linked website I'm not familiar with. This one looks... interesting.
It has header sections including "Bill Gates", "Pesticides" and "ultra-processed foods"
Which *really* set my spider-senses tingling.
Fuck, yeah, why are they worried abour "Pesticides" and "Ultra-processed foods"???
What a bunch of cranks
You are a dangerous fool. Your sort of sh*t is exactly how people get dragged into cults and misinformation black holes.
And how does "Bill Gates" fit into your thinking?
No idea. Anyway I've just given you THE TIMES and Jeremy Farrar as an alternative source for the exact same information. So you can put away your angry little pecker of outrage
Exactly. You don't think. You are almost uniquely incapable of thought. Thought, to you, is just which sad girl will accept the least money for you to wait hours for the blue pills to take effect. Your brain is the nearest humanity has found to a vacuum. Scientists are examining your skull to see how something so thin can withstand a 1atm pressure difference.
Why am I reacting this way? You're going through the lableak hypothesis because it's dramatic. Because lots of people died, and you think blaming the Chinese is cool.
RFK Jr is involved with that website, and if you cared one jot for people, then he would be one person you would run a mile from. You would spit in his face. You would throw rotten tomatoes at him in the stocks. RFK Jr was one of the key people spreading MMR disinformation, hence harming efforts to stop the spread of those diseases, and harming vaccination as a whole.
*If* you had a conscience, you would eat pizzas with pineapple for the next week to make amends.
But you don't have a conscience.
Look, I get you’ve got a weird crush on me. But please. Some decorum
"A striking still-life fresco resembling a pizza has been found among the ruins of ancient Pompeii... and includes one item that looks suspiciously like a pineapple."
Did you bother to even read that article before you posted it?
"Fish fingers are still a good way to get the wary to eat fish. After Birds Eye developed fish fingers, it created the tagline “no bones, no waste, no smell, no fuss” and that still holds. So what else is in there? Nothing too odd, it seems."
Which part of 65% fish did you fail to understand?
from the article
"There’s not a lot of fish in fingers compared to a full-size fillet, but they are an easy way to have fish. The only question for Captain Birds Eye now is whether to fry or grill them."
The notion that pay policy should be used to curb inflation was rightly castigated 50 years ago by Enoch Powell when he asked Heath if he’d taken leave of his senses, by introducing pay controls.
But it sounds more dignified than "if we increase public sector pay there won't be money left for tax cuts."
In 2013, the WIV collected animal samples from which they identified the bat coronavirus RaTG13, which is 96.2 percent similar to the COVID-19 virus. By 2018, the WIV had sequenced almost all of RaTG13, which is the second closest known whole genome match to SARS-CoV-2, after BANAL-52, which is 96.8 percent similar. Neither of these viruses is close enough to SARS-CoV-2 to be a direct progenitor.
And:
We assess that some scientists at the WIV have genetically engineered coronaviruses using common laboratory practices. The IC has no information, however, indicating that any WIV genetic engineering work has involved SARS-CoV-2, a close progenitor, or a backbone virus that is closely-related enough to have been the source of the pandemic.
And:
Several WIV researchers were ill in Fall 2019 with symptoms; some of their symptoms were consistent with but not diagnostic of COVID-19. The IC continues to assess that this information neither supports nor refutes either hypothesis of the pandemic’s origins because the researchers’ symptoms could have been caused by a number of diseases and some of the symptoms were not consistent with COVID-19. Consistent with standard practices, those researchers likely completed annual health exams as part of their duties in a highcontainment biosafety laboratory. The IC assesses that the WIV maintains blood samples and health records of all of their laboratory personnel—which are standard procedures in highcontainment laboratories.
• We have no indications that any of these researchers were hospitalized because of the symptoms consistent with COVID-19. One researcher may have been hospitalized in this timeframe for treatment of a non-respiratory medical condition.
• China’s National Security Commission investigated the WIV in early 2020 and took blood samples from WIV researchers. According to the World Health Organization's March 2021 public report, WIV officials including Shi Zhengli—who leads the WIV laboratory group that conducts coronavirus research—stated lab employee samples all tested negative for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies.
Your hero, the boffin you proudly cite, went from privately saying this:
“I really can’t think of a plausible natural scenario . . . . I just can’t figure out how this [Coronavirus] gets accomplished in nature . . . . Of course, in the lab it would be easy . ."
To publicly publishing this, just 48 hours later:
"However, since we observed all notable SARS-CoV-2 features, including the optimized RBD and polybasic cleavage site, in related coronaviruses in nature, we do not believe that any type of laboratory-based scenario is plausible."
Bravo, bravo
I think the Rothschilds are to blame for Covid.
On the contrary, it is obviously space aliens from outer space
Maybe the rothschilds are aliens from outer space?
Interestingly I am off to the Hockney light thingy, then I am going to a dinner where there will be an actual Rothschild at the table. Joining us. Any questions about secret water etc, please let me know. I’ll sneak em in over the starters
"the absence of evidence for a lab leak, and in the presence of evidence for the market as the source" is mere fantasy. To believe it you have to believe that circumstantial evidence is conclusive in favour of the market and inadmissible in favour of the lab, and to ignore the huge debate about whether the furin cleavage site is likely to have arisen in nature.
The evidence for the market is not circumstantial. The early cases were clustered around the market. Environmental analyses found the virus in the market. That there were two initial strains of SARS-COV-2 is consistent with a reservoir of infected animals in the market.
It is, if course, entirely possible for the wet market to be both the focal point, and it to have been a lab leak.
That., of course, it almost certainly what happened. Leaked in the lab - the CDC more likely than the WIV - simply because of proximity - 300 metres away. Infected but pre-symptomatic lab worker went from the CDC to the market to buy a chicken. Bingo. Superspreader event, clustered around the market
It's not obvious to me.
Wild -> lab -> market is plausible and you assert that the wild -> lab bit was happening (and I have no reason to disbelieve this) but the lab -> market bit still requires some lapses that are fairly rare and the timing has to be just right (they do happen, it is certainly possible)
Wild -> market is also plausible and while you assert that wild -> animal in market is unlikely (and again I have no reason to disbelieve) there's also potential for a chain of transmission through animals (or containers, surfaces, air) to market or even indeed a person infected elsewhere (not from lab, closer to large populations of bats) taking it to the market.
I don't see a strong reason to favour one of those over the other, on the available evidence.
If the outbreak had happened in any other city in China, then a purely zoonotic origin would be the most likely scenario. That it happened in the same city where bat diseases were being actively studied skews the probabilities the other way around.
Most large Chinese cities have labs studying coronaviruses. If you're worried about zoonotic infections in China, you're looking at bat diseases. So, if the outbreak had happened in any other city in China, there's a high chance there would have been a similar lab.
This doesn't seem to be true. The number of BSL-4 labs in China is very small.
And a lab leak can come from a BSL-3 lab. After all, WCDC is not BSL-4 lab, and that's the one Leon is most animated about. If it was artificially manipulated, then the odds change. If it was a natural sample leaked (which is where the focus now lies), then it's any BSL-3 lab or higher.
(Edited - BSL-3)
The CDC was, I believe, operating at BSL 2
That's why Jeremy Farrar's first reaction, on hearing about Covid, was that the lab work in China was "like the Wild West". He also believed it probably came from the lab
Yet weirdly enough about six minutes after writing that email he signed a letter to the Lancet calling "lab leak" a baseless conspiracy theory
Funny, huh
Proof that some of this terrifying bat research was done at BSL2 level (I reckon this is the Wuhan CDC they are talking about)
"In EHA-led work conducted in Wuhan, scientists infected humanized mice with engineered novel bat coronaviruses in a BSL-3 facility, according to grant documents EHA submitted to the NIH. Some collection and engineering of bat coronaviruses were done in a BSL-2, with less stringent protocols and containment, according to multiple sources including a paper in the Journal of Virology ."
I always find it's good to look at the home page of any linked website I'm not familiar with. This one looks... interesting.
It has header sections including "Bill Gates", "Pesticides" and "ultra-processed foods"
Which *really* set my spider-senses tingling.
Fuck, yeah, why are they worried abour "Pesticides" and "Ultra-processed foods"???
What a bunch of cranks
You are a dangerous fool. Your sort of sh*t is exactly how people get dragged into cults and misinformation black holes.
And how does "Bill Gates" fit into your thinking?
No idea. Anyway I've just given you THE TIMES and Jeremy Farrar as an alternative source for the exact same information. So you can put away your angry little pecker of outrage
Exactly. You don't think. You are almost uniquely incapable of thought. Thought, to you, is just which sad girl will accept the least money for you to wait hours for the blue pills to take effect. Your brain is the nearest humanity has found to a vacuum. Scientists are examining your skull to see how something so thin can withstand a 1atm pressure difference.
Why am I reacting this way? You're going through the lableak hypothesis because it's dramatic. Because lots of people died, and you think blaming the Chinese is cool.
RFK Jr is involved with that website, and if you cared one jot for people, then he would be one person you would run a mile from. You would spit in his face. You would throw rotten tomatoes at him in the stocks. RFK Jr was one of the key people spreading MMR disinformation, hence harming efforts to stop the spread of those diseases, and harming vaccination as a whole.
*If* you had a conscience, you would eat pizzas with pineapple for the next week to make amends.
But you don't have a conscience.
Look, I get you’ve got a weird crush on me. But please. Some decorum
I'll leave the 'weird crushes' to you.
But please understand my point wrt JFK Jr: he is a shit. An evil shit. This is nothing to do with politics; just to do with the 'causes' he has built his political following on, and ones you unthinkingly promote.
@MikeSmithson I hope you get better as soon as possible. Good luck with your recovery.
So Labour's lead of 27% in the Red Wall poll just out would mean they'd win back all 40 of those seats. Their lead is currently higher than the Conservative share of the vote.
"the absence of evidence for a lab leak, and in the presence of evidence for the market as the source" is mere fantasy. To believe it you have to believe that circumstantial evidence is conclusive in favour of the market and inadmissible in favour of the lab, and to ignore the huge debate about whether the furin cleavage site is likely to have arisen in nature.
The evidence for the market is not circumstantial. The early cases were clustered around the market. Environmental analyses found the virus in the market. That there were two initial strains of SARS-COV-2 is consistent with a reservoir of infected animals in the market.
It is, if course, entirely possible for the wet market to be both the focal point, and it to have been a lab leak.
That., of course, it almost certainly what happened. Leaked in the lab - the CDC more likely than the WIV - simply because of proximity - 300 metres away. Infected but pre-symptomatic lab worker went from the CDC to the market to buy a chicken. Bingo. Superspreader event, clustered around the market
It's not obvious to me.
Wild -> lab -> market is plausible and you assert that the wild -> lab bit was happening (and I have no reason to disbelieve this) but the lab -> market bit still requires some lapses that are fairly rare and the timing has to be just right (they do happen, it is certainly possible)
Wild -> market is also plausible and while you assert that wild -> animal in market is unlikely (and again I have no reason to disbelieve) there's also potential for a chain of transmission through animals (or containers, surfaces, air) to market or even indeed a person infected elsewhere (not from lab, closer to large populations of bats) taking it to the market.
I don't see a strong reason to favour one of those over the other, on the available evidence.
If the outbreak had happened in any other city in China, then a purely zoonotic origin would be the most likely scenario. That it happened in the same city where bat diseases were being actively studied skews the probabilities the other way around.
Most large Chinese cities have labs studying coronaviruses. If you're worried about zoonotic infections in China, you're looking at bat diseases. So, if the outbreak had happened in any other city in China, there's a high chance there would have been a similar lab.
This doesn't seem to be true. The number of BSL-4 labs in China is very small.
And a lab leak can come from a BSL-3 lab. After all, WCDC is not BSL-4 lab, and that's the one Leon is most animated about. If it was artificially manipulated, then the odds change. If it was a natural sample leaked (which is where the focus now lies), then it's any BSL-3 lab or higher.
(Edited - BSL-3)
The CDC was, I believe, operating at BSL 2
That's why Jeremy Farrar's first reaction, on hearing about Covid, was that the lab work in China was "like the Wild West". He also believed it probably came from the lab
Yet weirdly enough about six minutes after writing that email he signed a letter to the Lancet calling "lab leak" a baseless conspiracy theory
Funny, huh
Proof that some of this terrifying bat research was done at BSL2 level (I reckon this is the Wuhan CDC they are talking about)
"In EHA-led work conducted in Wuhan, scientists infected humanized mice with engineered novel bat coronaviruses in a BSL-3 facility, according to grant documents EHA submitted to the NIH. Some collection and engineering of bat coronaviruses were done in a BSL-2, with less stringent protocols and containment, according to multiple sources including a paper in the Journal of Virology ."
I always find it's good to look at the home page of any linked website I'm not familiar with. This one looks... interesting.
It has header sections including "Bill Gates", "Pesticides" and "ultra-processed foods"
Which *really* set my spider-senses tingling.
Fuck, yeah, why are they worried abour "Pesticides" and "Ultra-processed foods"???
What a bunch of cranks
You are a dangerous fool. Your sort of sh*t is exactly how people get dragged into cults and misinformation black holes.
And how does "Bill Gates" fit into your thinking?
No idea. Anyway I've just given you THE TIMES and Jeremy Farrar as an alternative source for the exact same information. So you can put away your angry little pecker of outrage
Exactly. You don't think. You are almost uniquely incapable of thought. Thought, to you, is just which sad girl will accept the least money for you to wait hours for the blue pills to take effect. Your brain is the nearest humanity has found to a vacuum. Scientists are examining your skull to see how something so thin can withstand a 1atm pressure difference.
Why am I reacting this way? You're going through the lableak hypothesis because it's dramatic. Because lots of people died, and you think blaming the Chinese is cool.
RFK Jr is involved with that website, and if you cared one jot for people, then he would be one person you would run a mile from. You would spit in his face. You would throw rotten tomatoes at him in the stocks. RFK Jr was one of the key people spreading MMR disinformation, hence harming efforts to stop the spread of those diseases, and harming vaccination as a whole.
*If* you had a conscience, you would eat pizzas with pineapple for the next week to make amends.
But you don't have a conscience.
The merits of most sorts of theory are pretty much independent of the morals of the people adhering to it. Hitler was probably a convinced heliocentric.
Industrial accidents with dire consequences are commonplace and not really that exciting, I would not have thought. Bhopal - the Movie may exist, but it'll be a downbeat documentary.
And most importantly, lab leak is the least Chinese-blamey game in town by a country mile. US Big Science was balls deep in the gain of function nonsense, whereas wet markets is 100% the inscrutable oriental.
"A striking still-life fresco resembling a pizza has been found among the ruins of ancient Pompeii... and includes one item that looks suspiciously like a pineapple."
Did you bother to even read that article before you posted it?
"Fish fingers are still a good way to get the wary to eat fish. After Birds Eye developed fish fingers, it created the tagline “no bones, no waste, no smell, no fuss” and that still holds. So what else is in there? Nothing too odd, it seems."
Which part of 65% fish did you fail to understand?
from the article
"There’s not a lot of fish in fingers compared to a full-size fillet, but they are an easy way to have fish. The only question for Captain Birds Eye now is whether to fry or grill them."
Where does it say less than 65% fish?
Edit: I'd like to apologise Pagan. It may not say anything about 65% in the article but I've just checked the Waitrose website for Bird's Eye Cod fish fingers...
PB lefties and loons and persons-of-the-tiny-pecker-commminity (Aka @JosiasJessop and @kinabalu) must have an entire portfolio of questions I can lob at him over the lobster claws
2 year UK gilt now at 5.24% new 15 year high, half a %age point above post mini budget peak. markets now see 70% chance of rates over 6% by end of year…
I posted yesterday that there is no alternative to the policies of Sunak and Hunt and this is hard, very hard
The last property crisis lasted from 1991 to 2001 and there is every reason to believe this could be similar
I would gently remind folks that the 1976 labour government's financial crisis needed the intervention of the IMF with big cuts in public spending, let's hope we are not on the same course today
BoE is supposed to handle inflation and they have failed utterly.
2% target?
WTF.
Liz Truss was right in the first place that the monetary policy framework needs to be looked at again. Depoliticised CPI targetting was a superficially attractive policy but has been one of the root causes of two major crises in a row.
It just means the BOE (and every other quango for that matter) takes their cue from whatever junket that they last attended rather than from the UK Government.
And BigG is completely wrong about there not being an alternative, the alternative is to drive down the cost of energy by increasing the supply of it. This is an energy cost-driven inflation. It has bugger all to do with a consumer-driven boom. It is completely bizarre that commentators are bemoaning how rich they think everyone is in the UK at the moment.
Serious question: how much actual effect on energy supply do you think the government could have if they chose?
@Luckyguy1983 supports fracking, development of coal, and most everything that is politically impossible to achieve including no doubt abolishing net zero which is classic right wing politics at present
I know, and none of those things will make any significant impact on global energy supplies - unlike further investment in renewables which bizarrely he is against.
Horseshit. I am massively supportive of a huge investment in tidal, because tidal is a classic investment - an initial outlay with the pay off of relatively cheap, dependable power on a more or less indefinite basis. I am against further 'investment' (if chucking subsidy money at overseas wealth funds can be considered an investment) in wind and solar, because they will never provide cheap or dependable power, which RCS, with his industry experience has acknowledged, and you would know if you bothered to educate yourself beyond agreeing with Keir Starmer's platitudes.
As for 'politically impossible', Germany is subject to exactly the same external political pressures as we are (possibly more due to the EU), yet they are razing towns to dig coal mines because they refuse to offshore their economy and impoverish their people - that's the bottom line. Sadly our useless excuse for a Government doesn't have a bottom line.
As for Net Zero, I am not for abandoning it (though any elected Government should reserve the right to do so), I am for finding creative ways to meet the target (such as dressing fields with rock dust) that don't involve taking our economy back to the dark ages. And if necessary, being prepared to miss the target if it proves incompatible with economical survival. You will find this approach is very unpopular with proponents of Net Zero, who are worried that other ways of meeting the target may be found and people may be allowed to continue their 'high carbon lifestyles' - because control over peoples' lifestyles was the whole point.
"the absence of evidence for a lab leak, and in the presence of evidence for the market as the source" is mere fantasy. To believe it you have to believe that circumstantial evidence is conclusive in favour of the market and inadmissible in favour of the lab, and to ignore the huge debate about whether the furin cleavage site is likely to have arisen in nature.
The evidence for the market is not circumstantial. The early cases were clustered around the market. Environmental analyses found the virus in the market. That there were two initial strains of SARS-COV-2 is consistent with a reservoir of infected animals in the market.
It is, if course, entirely possible for the wet market to be both the focal point, and it to have been a lab leak.
That., of course, it almost certainly what happened. Leaked in the lab - the CDC more likely than the WIV - simply because of proximity - 300 metres away. Infected but pre-symptomatic lab worker went from the CDC to the market to buy a chicken. Bingo. Superspreader event, clustered around the market
It's not obvious to me.
Wild -> lab -> market is plausible and you assert that the wild -> lab bit was happening (and I have no reason to disbelieve this) but the lab -> market bit still requires some lapses that are fairly rare and the timing has to be just right (they do happen, it is certainly possible)
Wild -> market is also plausible and while you assert that wild -> animal in market is unlikely (and again I have no reason to disbelieve) there's also potential for a chain of transmission through animals (or containers, surfaces, air) to market or even indeed a person infected elsewhere (not from lab, closer to large populations of bats) taking it to the market.
I don't see a strong reason to favour one of those over the other, on the available evidence.
If the outbreak had happened in any other city in China, then a purely zoonotic origin would be the most likely scenario. That it happened in the same city where bat diseases were being actively studied skews the probabilities the other way around.
Most large Chinese cities have labs studying coronaviruses. If you're worried about zoonotic infections in China, you're looking at bat diseases. So, if the outbreak had happened in any other city in China, there's a high chance there would have been a similar lab.
This doesn't seem to be true. The number of BSL-4 labs in China is very small.
And a lab leak can come from a BSL-3 lab. After all, WCDC is not BSL-4 lab, and that's the one Leon is most animated about. If it was artificially manipulated, then the odds change. If it was a natural sample leaked (which is where the focus now lies), then it's any BSL-3 lab or higher.
(Edited - BSL-3)
The CDC was, I believe, operating at BSL 2
That's why Jeremy Farrar's first reaction, on hearing about Covid, was that the lab work in China was "like the Wild West". He also believed it probably came from the lab
Yet weirdly enough about six minutes after writing that email he signed a letter to the Lancet calling "lab leak" a baseless conspiracy theory
Funny, huh
Proof that some of this terrifying bat research was done at BSL2 level (I reckon this is the Wuhan CDC they are talking about)
"In EHA-led work conducted in Wuhan, scientists infected humanized mice with engineered novel bat coronaviruses in a BSL-3 facility, according to grant documents EHA submitted to the NIH. Some collection and engineering of bat coronaviruses were done in a BSL-2, with less stringent protocols and containment, according to multiple sources including a paper in the Journal of Virology ."
I always find it's good to look at the home page of any linked website I'm not familiar with. This one looks... interesting.
It has header sections including "Bill Gates", "Pesticides" and "ultra-processed foods"
Which *really* set my spider-senses tingling.
Fuck, yeah, why are they worried abour "Pesticides" and "Ultra-processed foods"???
What a bunch of cranks
You are a dangerous fool. Your sort of sh*t is exactly how people get dragged into cults and misinformation black holes.
And how does "Bill Gates" fit into your thinking?
No idea. Anyway I've just given you THE TIMES and Jeremy Farrar as an alternative source for the exact same information. So you can put away your angry little pecker of outrage
Exactly. You don't think. You are almost uniquely incapable of thought. Thought, to you, is just which sad girl will accept the least money for you to wait hours for the blue pills to take effect. Your brain is the nearest humanity has found to a vacuum. Scientists are examining your skull to see how something so thin can withstand a 1atm pressure difference.
Why am I reacting this way? You're going through the lableak hypothesis because it's dramatic. Because lots of people died, and you think blaming the Chinese is cool.
RFK Jr is involved with that website, and if you cared one jot for people, then he would be one person you would run a mile from. You would spit in his face. You would throw rotten tomatoes at him in the stocks. RFK Jr was one of the key people spreading MMR disinformation, hence harming efforts to stop the spread of those diseases, and harming vaccination as a whole.
*If* you had a conscience, you would eat pizzas with pineapple for the next week to make amends.
But you don't have a conscience.
The merits of most sorts of theory are pretty much independent of the morals of the people adhering to it. Hitler was probably a convinced heliocentric.
Industrial accidents with dire consequences are commonplace and not really that exciting, I would not have thought. Bhopal - the Movie may exist, but it'll be a downbeat documentary.
And most importantly, lab leak is the least Chinese-blamey game in town by a country mile. US Big Science was balls deep in the gain of function nonsense, whereas wet markets is 100% the inscrutable oriental.
Three points for Godwinning yourself. One point for missing the point. A zillion points for getting blame-the-US in the conversation.
Do you have kids? Did they get the MMR jab?
*Of course* lab leak is Chinese-blamey game - especially as it often leads onto the designed-virus stuff.
"Sen. Rubio’s extraordinary comments set the tone for remarkable legislation that ends funding for illegal UAP programs and sets strict deadlines for whistleblowers.
Like the current (and a former) IC IG, key senators find Grusch’s stunning claims credible."
Cue bafflement and silence from most of the media. UFO's, culturally, are understand to be for nutters.
Because there is zero evidence. Nothing, Nada. Just the usual round of grifters.
"A striking still-life fresco resembling a pizza has been found among the ruins of ancient Pompeii... and includes one item that looks suspiciously like a pineapple."
Did you bother to even read that article before you posted it?
"Fish fingers are still a good way to get the wary to eat fish. After Birds Eye developed fish fingers, it created the tagline “no bones, no waste, no smell, no fuss” and that still holds. So what else is in there? Nothing too odd, it seems."
Which part of 65% fish did you fail to understand?
from the article
"There’s not a lot of fish in fingers compared to a full-size fillet, but they are an easy way to have fish. The only question for Captain Birds Eye now is whether to fry or grill them."
Where does it say less than 65% fish?
Edit: I'd like to apologise Pagan. It may not say anything about 65% in the article but I've just checked the Waitrose website for Bird's Eye Cod fish fingers...
I’d be interested to see a ‘what if Tories were still led by Boris’ version of this polling.
You could certainly add some that 9% RefUK total to the Tories then
...and even more of that 26% Tory total to the LDs and Labour.
Labour maybe, the lib dems will not end up on anymore seats than they currently get
You think the LDs will end up with just 12 or so seats?
Now, I'm pretty LibDemsceptic, but even I think they're going to make gains. Simply, if the LD vote is largely flat on 2019, while the Conservative vote is down (say) five percentage points, they'll win a couple.
I'd say Cheltenham, Winchester, and Guilford all look highly vulnerable to them, and all have seen the LDs surge at the local level.
Cheadle and Hazel Grove too. Not a single Conservative councillor left in Stockport.
PB lefties and loons and persons-of-the-tiny-pecker-commminity (Aka @JosiasJessop and @kinabalu) must have an entire portfolio of questions I can lob at him over the lobster claws
I'm having dinner with my wife. It's a lovely experience. I'll ask her how day was, if you like.
(The modern-day Rothschild's don't interest me in the least.)
"Sen. Rubio’s extraordinary comments set the tone for remarkable legislation that ends funding for illegal UAP programs and sets strict deadlines for whistleblowers.
Like the current (and a former) IC IG, key senators find Grusch’s stunning claims credible."
Cue bafflement and silence from most of the media. UFO's, culturally, are understand to be for nutters.
Because there is zero evidence. Nothing, Nada. Just the usual round of grifters.
I personally doubt that very much. These people have to give evidence on oath, and they're very senior military and intelligence people. And then there are also all the recent changes in legislation the Hill article mentions, which would tend to support the idea that the state apparatus is trying to accommodate a whole series of credible recent whistleblowers on the topic.
So I think the only two possibilities are very deliberate large-scale misinformation, or that some of the kind of things that are considered beyond the pale by so many people, are right.
"A striking still-life fresco resembling a pizza has been found among the ruins of ancient Pompeii... and includes one item that looks suspiciously like a pineapple."
Did you bother to even read that article before you posted it?
"Fish fingers are still a good way to get the wary to eat fish. After Birds Eye developed fish fingers, it created the tagline “no bones, no waste, no smell, no fuss” and that still holds. So what else is in there? Nothing too odd, it seems."
Which part of 65% fish did you fail to understand?
from the article
"There’s not a lot of fish in fingers compared to a full-size fillet, but they are an easy way to have fish. The only question for Captain Birds Eye now is whether to fry or grill them."
Where does it say less than 65% fish?
Edit: I'd like to apologise Pagan. It may not say anything about 65% in the article but I've just checked the Waitrose website for Bird's Eye Cod fish fingers...
PB lefties and loons and persons-of-the-tiny-pecker-commminity (Aka @JosiasJessop and @kinabalu) must have an entire portfolio of questions I can lob at him over the lobster claws
See if they know how best to make a meal from pizza base, bananas, nutella, fish finger, pineapple and stawberries. All ingredients must be used but allowed two courses if preferred.
"the absence of evidence for a lab leak, and in the presence of evidence for the market as the source" is mere fantasy. To believe it you have to believe that circumstantial evidence is conclusive in favour of the market and inadmissible in favour of the lab, and to ignore the huge debate about whether the furin cleavage site is likely to have arisen in nature.
The evidence for the market is not circumstantial. The early cases were clustered around the market. Environmental analyses found the virus in the market. That there were two initial strains of SARS-COV-2 is consistent with a reservoir of infected animals in the market.
It is, if course, entirely possible for the wet market to be both the focal point, and it to have been a lab leak.
That., of course, it almost certainly what happened. Leaked in the lab - the CDC more likely than the WIV - simply because of proximity - 300 metres away. Infected but pre-symptomatic lab worker went from the CDC to the market to buy a chicken. Bingo. Superspreader event, clustered around the market
It's not obvious to me.
Wild -> lab -> market is plausible and you assert that the wild -> lab bit was happening (and I have no reason to disbelieve this) but the lab -> market bit still requires some lapses that are fairly rare and the timing has to be just right (they do happen, it is certainly possible)
Wild -> market is also plausible and while you assert that wild -> animal in market is unlikely (and again I have no reason to disbelieve) there's also potential for a chain of transmission through animals (or containers, surfaces, air) to market or even indeed a person infected elsewhere (not from lab, closer to large populations of bats) taking it to the market.
I don't see a strong reason to favour one of those over the other, on the available evidence.
If the outbreak had happened in any other city in China, then a purely zoonotic origin would be the most likely scenario. That it happened in the same city where bat diseases were being actively studied skews the probabilities the other way around.
Most large Chinese cities have labs studying coronaviruses. If you're worried about zoonotic infections in China, you're looking at bat diseases. So, if the outbreak had happened in any other city in China, there's a high chance there would have been a similar lab.
This doesn't seem to be true. The number of BSL-4 labs in China is very small.
And a lab leak can come from a BSL-3 lab. After all, WCDC is not BSL-4 lab, and that's the one Leon is most animated about. If it was artificially manipulated, then the odds change. If it was a natural sample leaked (which is where the focus now lies), then it's any BSL-3 lab or higher.
(Edited - BSL-3)
The CDC was, I believe, operating at BSL 2
That's why Jeremy Farrar's first reaction, on hearing about Covid, was that the lab work in China was "like the Wild West". He also believed it probably came from the lab
Yet weirdly enough about six minutes after writing that email he signed a letter to the Lancet calling "lab leak" a baseless conspiracy theory
Funny, huh
Proof that some of this terrifying bat research was done at BSL2 level (I reckon this is the Wuhan CDC they are talking about)
"In EHA-led work conducted in Wuhan, scientists infected humanized mice with engineered novel bat coronaviruses in a BSL-3 facility, according to grant documents EHA submitted to the NIH. Some collection and engineering of bat coronaviruses were done in a BSL-2, with less stringent protocols and containment, according to multiple sources including a paper in the Journal of Virology ."
I always find it's good to look at the home page of any linked website I'm not familiar with. This one looks... interesting.
It has header sections including "Bill Gates", "Pesticides" and "ultra-processed foods"
Which *really* set my spider-senses tingling.
Fuck, yeah, why are they worried abour "Pesticides" and "Ultra-processed foods"???
What a bunch of cranks
You are a dangerous fool. Your sort of sh*t is exactly how people get dragged into cults and misinformation black holes.
And how does "Bill Gates" fit into your thinking?
No idea. Anyway I've just given you THE TIMES and Jeremy Farrar as an alternative source for the exact same information. So you can put away your angry little pecker of outrage
Exactly. You don't think. You are almost uniquely incapable of thought. Thought, to you, is just which sad girl will accept the least money for you to wait hours for the blue pills to take effect. Your brain is the nearest humanity has found to a vacuum. Scientists are examining your skull to see how something so thin can withstand a 1atm pressure difference.
Why am I reacting this way? You're going through the lableak hypothesis because it's dramatic. Because lots of people died, and you think blaming the Chinese is cool.
RFK Jr is involved with that website, and if you cared one jot for people, then he would be one person you would run a mile from. You would spit in his face. You would throw rotten tomatoes at him in the stocks. RFK Jr was one of the key people spreading MMR disinformation, hence harming efforts to stop the spread of those diseases, and harming vaccination as a whole.
*If* you had a conscience, you would eat pizzas with pineapple for the next week to make amends.
But you don't have a conscience.
Look, I get you’ve got a weird crush on me. But please. Some decorum
I'll leave the 'weird crushes' to you.
But please understand my point wrt JFK Jr: he is a shit. An evil shit. This is nothing to do with politics; just to do with the 'causes' he has built his political following on, and ones you unthinkingly promote.
Please, please, please, check your sources.
Yeah, but look at his 6 pack. Leon has been known to go a bit strange in the presence of strong men.
"A striking still-life fresco resembling a pizza has been found among the ruins of ancient Pompeii... and includes one item that looks suspiciously like a pineapple."
Did you bother to even read that article before you posted it?
"Fish fingers are still a good way to get the wary to eat fish. After Birds Eye developed fish fingers, it created the tagline “no bones, no waste, no smell, no fuss” and that still holds. So what else is in there? Nothing too odd, it seems."
Which part of 65% fish did you fail to understand?
from the article
"There’s not a lot of fish in fingers compared to a full-size fillet, but they are an easy way to have fish. The only question for Captain Birds Eye now is whether to fry or grill them."
Where does it say less than 65% fish?
Edit: I'd like to apologise Pagan. It may not say anything about 65% in the article but I've just checked the Waitrose website for Bird's Eye Cod fish fingers...
"the absence of evidence for a lab leak, and in the presence of evidence for the market as the source" is mere fantasy. To believe it you have to believe that circumstantial evidence is conclusive in favour of the market and inadmissible in favour of the lab, and to ignore the huge debate about whether the furin cleavage site is likely to have arisen in nature.
The evidence for the market is not circumstantial. The early cases were clustered around the market. Environmental analyses found the virus in the market. That there were two initial strains of SARS-COV-2 is consistent with a reservoir of infected animals in the market.
It is, if course, entirely possible for the wet market to be both the focal point, and it to have been a lab leak.
That., of course, it almost certainly what happened. Leaked in the lab - the CDC more likely than the WIV - simply because of proximity - 300 metres away. Infected but pre-symptomatic lab worker went from the CDC to the market to buy a chicken. Bingo. Superspreader event, clustered around the market
It's not obvious to me.
Wild -> lab -> market is plausible and you assert that the wild -> lab bit was happening (and I have no reason to disbelieve this) but the lab -> market bit still requires some lapses that are fairly rare and the timing has to be just right (they do happen, it is certainly possible)
Wild -> market is also plausible and while you assert that wild -> animal in market is unlikely (and again I have no reason to disbelieve) there's also potential for a chain of transmission through animals (or containers, surfaces, air) to market or even indeed a person infected elsewhere (not from lab, closer to large populations of bats) taking it to the market.
I don't see a strong reason to favour one of those over the other, on the available evidence.
If the outbreak had happened in any other city in China, then a purely zoonotic origin would be the most likely scenario. That it happened in the same city where bat diseases were being actively studied skews the probabilities the other way around.
Most large Chinese cities have labs studying coronaviruses. If you're worried about zoonotic infections in China, you're looking at bat diseases. So, if the outbreak had happened in any other city in China, there's a high chance there would have been a similar lab.
This doesn't seem to be true. The number of BSL-4 labs in China is very small.
And a lab leak can come from a BSL-3 lab. After all, WCDC is not BSL-4 lab, and that's the one Leon is most animated about. If it was artificially manipulated, then the odds change. If it was a natural sample leaked (which is where the focus now lies), then it's any BSL-3 lab or higher.
(Edited - BSL-3)
The CDC was, I believe, operating at BSL 2
That's why Jeremy Farrar's first reaction, on hearing about Covid, was that the lab work in China was "like the Wild West". He also believed it probably came from the lab
Yet weirdly enough about six minutes after writing that email he signed a letter to the Lancet calling "lab leak" a baseless conspiracy theory
Funny, huh
Proof that some of this terrifying bat research was done at BSL2 level (I reckon this is the Wuhan CDC they are talking about)
"In EHA-led work conducted in Wuhan, scientists infected humanized mice with engineered novel bat coronaviruses in a BSL-3 facility, according to grant documents EHA submitted to the NIH. Some collection and engineering of bat coronaviruses were done in a BSL-2, with less stringent protocols and containment, according to multiple sources including a paper in the Journal of Virology ."
I always find it's good to look at the home page of any linked website I'm not familiar with. This one looks... interesting.
It has header sections including "Bill Gates", "Pesticides" and "ultra-processed foods"
Which *really* set my spider-senses tingling.
Fuck, yeah, why are they worried abour "Pesticides" and "Ultra-processed foods"???
What a bunch of cranks
You are a dangerous fool. Your sort of sh*t is exactly how people get dragged into cults and misinformation black holes.
And how does "Bill Gates" fit into your thinking?
No idea. Anyway I've just given you THE TIMES and Jeremy Farrar as an alternative source for the exact same information. So you can put away your angry little pecker of outrage
Exactly. You don't think. You are almost uniquely incapable of thought. Thought, to you, is just which sad girl will accept the least money for you to wait hours for the blue pills to take effect. Your brain is the nearest humanity has found to a vacuum. Scientists are examining your skull to see how something so thin can withstand a 1atm pressure difference.
Why am I reacting this way? You're going through the lableak hypothesis because it's dramatic. Because lots of people died, and you think blaming the Chinese is cool.
RFK Jr is involved with that website, and if you cared one jot for people, then he would be one person you would run a mile from. You would spit in his face. You would throw rotten tomatoes at him in the stocks. RFK Jr was one of the key people spreading MMR disinformation, hence harming efforts to stop the spread of those diseases, and harming vaccination as a whole.
*If* you had a conscience, you would eat pizzas with pineapple for the next week to make amends.
But you don't have a conscience.
The merits of most sorts of theory are pretty much independent of the morals of the people adhering to it. Hitler was probably a convinced heliocentric.
Industrial accidents with dire consequences are commonplace and not really that exciting, I would not have thought. Bhopal - the Movie may exist, but it'll be a downbeat documentary.
And most importantly, lab leak is the least Chinese-blamey game in town by a country mile. US Big Science was balls deep in the gain of function nonsense, whereas wet markets is 100% the inscrutable oriental.
Three points for Godwinning yourself. One point for missing the point. A zillion points for getting blame-the-US in the conversation.
Do you have kids? Did they get the MMR jab?
*Of course* lab leak is Chinese-blamey game - especially as it often leads onto the designed-virus stuff.
You don't understand what "Godwin" means. It is widely understood and easily googled. Have a go.
What it doesn't mean, is using someone universally recognised as very evil, as an example of someone very evil. I can't see the problem with that, so please elucidate?
You don't seem to understand anything about any of this. Gain of function research is a recognised, mainstream, practice. You seem to think it is a sort of 4chan fantasy, or so I deduce from "designed-virus stuff."
And I wasn't "blaming the US." as a matter of fact I am not blaming anyone. I was saying IF someone else adheres to the lab leak theory THEN that other person holds the less anti-Chinese of the two possible views. It is hard to see how to conduct a rational conversation with someone who gets from there, to where you are.
And, politely, my childrens' medical records are off limits.
"A striking still-life fresco resembling a pizza has been found among the ruins of ancient Pompeii... and includes one item that looks suspiciously like a pineapple."
Did you bother to even read that article before you posted it?
"Fish fingers are still a good way to get the wary to eat fish. After Birds Eye developed fish fingers, it created the tagline “no bones, no waste, no smell, no fuss” and that still holds. So what else is in there? Nothing too odd, it seems."
Which part of 65% fish did you fail to understand?
from the article
"There’s not a lot of fish in fingers compared to a full-size fillet, but they are an easy way to have fish. The only question for Captain Birds Eye now is whether to fry or grill them."
Where does it say less than 65% fish?
Edit: I'd like to apologise Pagan. It may not say anything about 65% in the article but I've just checked the Waitrose website for Bird's Eye Cod fish fingers...
I once sat next to a member of the Rothschild family on a Dinard to London flight. He was absolutely charming and insisted on paying for my duty free As he was a Rothschild, I let him. It was a small plane and was all one class. He was returning from a yacht race.
@rcs1000 I've been meaning to ask you a follow up question to one I asked you a while back. It was about whether we had the generation capacity to charge up 3m cars every night
What about freight, and plant and farm machinery? Surely we're going to have to seriously increase our generation to satisfy that demand?
The most immediate movement we seem to have coming on generation capacity is downward: we have to 'Just Stop' burning fossil fuels
I know that we have loads more windfarms coming on stream over the next few years (if we can get the parts to finish them), but wind isn't reliable enough to be our main source of energy without a huge increase in storage capacity
I've read a lot of comments saying that having car batteries solves the problem of storage. I reckon at most it would mitigate it a little; How would people travel when the wind hadn't blown? And how much could you usefully store in cars beyond travel needs?
We need to build huge amounts of energy storage and we need to start now
2 year UK gilt now at 5.24% new 15 year high, half a %age point above post mini budget peak. markets now see 70% chance of rates over 6% by end of year…
I posted yesterday that there is no alternative to the policies of Sunak and Hunt and this is hard, very hard
The last property crisis lasted from 1991 to 2001 and there is every reason to believe this could be similar
I would gently remind folks that the 1976 labour government's financial crisis needed the intervention of the IMF with big cuts in public spending, let's hope we are not on the same course today
BoE is supposed to handle inflation and they have failed utterly.
2% target?
WTF.
Liz Truss was right in the first place that the monetary policy framework needs to be looked at again. Depoliticised CPI targetting was a superficially attractive policy but has been one of the root causes of two major crises in a row.
It just means the BOE (and every other quango for that matter) takes their cue from whatever junket that they last attended rather than from the UK Government.
And BigG is completely wrong about there not being an alternative, the alternative is to drive down the cost of energy by increasing the supply of it. This is an energy cost-driven inflation. It has bugger all to do with a consumer-driven boom. It is completely bizarre that commentators are bemoaning how rich they think everyone is in the UK at the moment.
Serious question: how much actual effect on energy supply do you think the government could have if they chose?
@Luckyguy1983 supports fracking, development of coal, and most everything that is politically impossible to achieve including no doubt abolishing net zero which is classic right wing politics at present
I know, and none of those things will make any significant impact on global energy supplies - unlike further investment in renewables which bizarrely he is against.
Horseshit. I am massively supportive of a huge investment in tidal, because tidal is a classic investment - an initial outlay with the pay off of relatively cheap, dependable power on a more or less indefinite basis. I am against further 'investment' (if chucking subsidy money at overseas wealth funds can be considered an investment) in wind and solar, because they will never provide cheap or dependable power, which RCS, with his industry experience has acknowledged, and you would know if you bothered to educate yourself beyond agreeing with Keir Starmer's platitudes.
As for 'politically impossible', Germany is subject to exactly the same external political pressures as we are (possibly more due to the EU), yet they are razing towns to dig coal mines because they refuse to offshore their economy and impoverish their people - that's the bottom line. Sadly our useless excuse for a Government doesn't have a bottom line.
As for Net Zero, I am not for abandoning it (though any elected Government should reserve the right to do so), I am for finding creative ways to meet the target (such as dressing fields with rock dust) that don't involve taking our economy back to the dark ages. And if necessary, being prepared to miss the target if it proves incompatible with economical survival. You will find this approach is very unpopular with proponents of Net Zero, who are worried that other ways of meeting the target may be found and people may be allowed to continue their 'high carbon lifestyles' - because control over peoples' lifestyles was the whole point.
Tidal energy is sensible, but decades away
Solar is productive and certainly our panels are excellent, and as far as wind is concerned investment is supported across the parties save maybe Tice and RefUK
You are not remotely realistic if you think the UK will follow Germany in coal, but then you support Truss so being unrealistic comes with the territory
You are going to have to come to terms with Starmer, PM, as it is happening and frankly to this conservative it will be a relief when he takes over what will be the ultimate hospital pass
"A striking still-life fresco resembling a pizza has been found among the ruins of ancient Pompeii... and includes one item that looks suspiciously like a pineapple."
Did you bother to even read that article before you posted it?
"Fish fingers are still a good way to get the wary to eat fish. After Birds Eye developed fish fingers, it created the tagline “no bones, no waste, no smell, no fuss” and that still holds. So what else is in there? Nothing too odd, it seems."
Which part of 65% fish did you fail to understand?
from the article
"There’s not a lot of fish in fingers compared to a full-size fillet, but they are an easy way to have fish. The only question for Captain Birds Eye now is whether to fry or grill them."
Where does it say less than 65% fish?
Edit: I'd like to apologise Pagan. It may not say anything about 65% in the article but I've just checked the Waitrose website for Bird's Eye Cod fish fingers...
Birds eye it says "Birds Eye’s box of 18 fish fingers uses just 58 per cent fish but keep reading the ingredients "
and here "Dunnes’ Alaskan Pollock fish fingers have 65 per cent fish fillet"
Yes, they have a coating, that's not exactly a secret.
The coating is thin and forms much less than 20% of a fishfinger. Sorry processed food is basically crap and even 58% cod is probably a large portion of stuff you wouldnt expect in a fillet of cod just like most beefburgers will contain lips, testicles etc.
"A striking still-life fresco resembling a pizza has been found among the ruins of ancient Pompeii... and includes one item that looks suspiciously like a pineapple."
Did you bother to even read that article before you posted it?
"Fish fingers are still a good way to get the wary to eat fish. After Birds Eye developed fish fingers, it created the tagline “no bones, no waste, no smell, no fuss” and that still holds. So what else is in there? Nothing too odd, it seems."
Which part of 65% fish did you fail to understand?
from the article
"There’s not a lot of fish in fingers compared to a full-size fillet, but they are an easy way to have fish. The only question for Captain Birds Eye now is whether to fry or grill them."
Where does it say less than 65% fish?
Edit: I'd like to apologise Pagan. It may not say anything about 65% in the article but I've just checked the Waitrose website for Bird's Eye Cod fish fingers...
PB lefties and loons and persons-of-the-tiny-pecker-commminity (Aka @JosiasJessop and @kinabalu) must have an entire portfolio of questions I can lob at him over the lobster claws
I was warming to you today Leon, but that is really a very sad post and you linked to a conspiracy site also. Will you be staring into his eyes all evening?
"A striking still-life fresco resembling a pizza has been found among the ruins of ancient Pompeii... and includes one item that looks suspiciously like a pineapple."
Did you bother to even read that article before you posted it?
"Fish fingers are still a good way to get the wary to eat fish. After Birds Eye developed fish fingers, it created the tagline “no bones, no waste, no smell, no fuss” and that still holds. So what else is in there? Nothing too odd, it seems."
Which part of 65% fish did you fail to understand?
from the article
"There’s not a lot of fish in fingers compared to a full-size fillet, but they are an easy way to have fish. The only question for Captain Birds Eye now is whether to fry or grill them."
Where does it say less than 65% fish?
Edit: I'd like to apologise Pagan. It may not say anything about 65% in the article but I've just checked the Waitrose website for Bird's Eye Cod fish fingers...
"A striking still-life fresco resembling a pizza has been found among the ruins of ancient Pompeii... and includes one item that looks suspiciously like a pineapple."
Did you bother to even read that article before you posted it?
"Fish fingers are still a good way to get the wary to eat fish. After Birds Eye developed fish fingers, it created the tagline “no bones, no waste, no smell, no fuss” and that still holds. So what else is in there? Nothing too odd, it seems."
Which part of 65% fish did you fail to understand?
from the article
"There’s not a lot of fish in fingers compared to a full-size fillet, but they are an easy way to have fish. The only question for Captain Birds Eye now is whether to fry or grill them."
Where does it say less than 65% fish?
Edit: I'd like to apologise Pagan. It may not say anything about 65% in the article but I've just checked the Waitrose website for Bird's Eye Cod fish fingers...
Birds eye it says "Birds Eye’s box of 18 fish fingers uses just 58 per cent fish but keep reading the ingredients "
and here "Dunnes’ Alaskan Pollock fish fingers have 65 per cent fish fillet"
Yes, they have a coating, that's not exactly a secret.
The coating is thin and forms much less than 20% of a fishfinger. Sorry processed food is basically crap and even 58% cod is probably a large portion of stuff you wouldnt expect in a fillet of cod just like most beefburgers will contain lips, testicles etc.
Haven't done them since my children grew out of them, but at least back then, named brands were recognisably proper fish, flaking in the right way etc, not fish mince.
PB lefties and loons and persons-of-the-tiny-pecker-commminity (Aka @JosiasJessop and @kinabalu) must have an entire portfolio of questions I can lob at him over the lobster claws
"the absence of evidence for a lab leak, and in the presence of evidence for the market as the source" is mere fantasy. To believe it you have to believe that circumstantial evidence is conclusive in favour of the market and inadmissible in favour of the lab, and to ignore the huge debate about whether the furin cleavage site is likely to have arisen in nature.
The evidence for the market is not circumstantial. The early cases were clustered around the market. Environmental analyses found the virus in the market. That there were two initial strains of SARS-COV-2 is consistent with a reservoir of infected animals in the market.
It is, if course, entirely possible for the wet market to be both the focal point, and it to have been a lab leak.
That., of course, it almost certainly what happened. Leaked in the lab - the CDC more likely than the WIV - simply because of proximity - 300 metres away. Infected but pre-symptomatic lab worker went from the CDC to the market to buy a chicken. Bingo. Superspreader event, clustered around the market
It's not obvious to me.
Wild -> lab -> market is plausible and you assert that the wild -> lab bit was happening (and I have no reason to disbelieve this) but the lab -> market bit still requires some lapses that are fairly rare and the timing has to be just right (they do happen, it is certainly possible)
Wild -> market is also plausible and while you assert that wild -> animal in market is unlikely (and again I have no reason to disbelieve) there's also potential for a chain of transmission through animals (or containers, surfaces, air) to market or even indeed a person infected elsewhere (not from lab, closer to large populations of bats) taking it to the market.
I don't see a strong reason to favour one of those over the other, on the available evidence.
If the outbreak had happened in any other city in China, then a purely zoonotic origin would be the most likely scenario. That it happened in the same city where bat diseases were being actively studied skews the probabilities the other way around.
Most large Chinese cities have labs studying coronaviruses. If you're worried about zoonotic infections in China, you're looking at bat diseases. So, if the outbreak had happened in any other city in China, there's a high chance there would have been a similar lab.
This doesn't seem to be true. The number of BSL-4 labs in China is very small.
And a lab leak can come from a BSL-3 lab. After all, WCDC is not BSL-4 lab, and that's the one Leon is most animated about. If it was artificially manipulated, then the odds change. If it was a natural sample leaked (which is where the focus now lies), then it's any BSL-3 lab or higher.
(Edited - BSL-3)
The CDC was, I believe, operating at BSL 2
That's why Jeremy Farrar's first reaction, on hearing about Covid, was that the lab work in China was "like the Wild West". He also believed it probably came from the lab
Yet weirdly enough about six minutes after writing that email he signed a letter to the Lancet calling "lab leak" a baseless conspiracy theory
Funny, huh
Proof that some of this terrifying bat research was done at BSL2 level (I reckon this is the Wuhan CDC they are talking about)
"In EHA-led work conducted in Wuhan, scientists infected humanized mice with engineered novel bat coronaviruses in a BSL-3 facility, according to grant documents EHA submitted to the NIH. Some collection and engineering of bat coronaviruses were done in a BSL-2, with less stringent protocols and containment, according to multiple sources including a paper in the Journal of Virology ."
I always find it's good to look at the home page of any linked website I'm not familiar with. This one looks... interesting.
It has header sections including "Bill Gates", "Pesticides" and "ultra-processed foods"
Which *really* set my spider-senses tingling.
Fuck, yeah, why are they worried abour "Pesticides" and "Ultra-processed foods"???
What a bunch of cranks
You are a dangerous fool. Your sort of sh*t is exactly how people get dragged into cults and misinformation black holes.
And how does "Bill Gates" fit into your thinking?
No idea. Anyway I've just given you THE TIMES and Jeremy Farrar as an alternative source for the exact same information. So you can put away your angry little pecker of outrage
Exactly. You don't think. You are almost uniquely incapable of thought. Thought, to you, is just which sad girl will accept the least money for you to wait hours for the blue pills to take effect. Your brain is the nearest humanity has found to a vacuum. Scientists are examining your skull to see how something so thin can withstand a 1atm pressure difference.
Why am I reacting this way? You're going through the lableak hypothesis because it's dramatic. Because lots of people died, and you think blaming the Chinese is cool.
RFK Jr is involved with that website, and if you cared one jot for people, then he would be one person you would run a mile from. You would spit in his face. You would throw rotten tomatoes at him in the stocks. RFK Jr was one of the key people spreading MMR disinformation, hence harming efforts to stop the spread of those diseases, and harming vaccination as a whole.
*If* you had a conscience, you would eat pizzas with pineapple for the next week to make amends.
But you don't have a conscience.
The merits of most sorts of theory are pretty much independent of the morals of the people adhering to it. Hitler was probably a convinced heliocentric.
Industrial accidents with dire consequences are commonplace and not really that exciting, I would not have thought. Bhopal - the Movie may exist, but it'll be a downbeat documentary.
And most importantly, lab leak is the least Chinese-blamey game in town by a country mile. US Big Science was balls deep in the gain of function nonsense, whereas wet markets is 100% the inscrutable oriental.
Three points for Godwinning yourself. One point for missing the point. A zillion points for getting blame-the-US in the conversation.
Do you have kids? Did they get the MMR jab?
*Of course* lab leak is Chinese-blamey game - especially as it often leads onto the designed-virus stuff.
You don't understand what "Godwin" means. It is widely understood and easily googled. Have a go.
What it doesn't mean, is using someone universally recognised as very evil, as an example of someone very evil. I can't see the problem with that, so please elucidate?
You don't seem to understand anything about any of this. Gain of function research is a recognised, mainstream, practice. You seem to think it is a sort of 4chan fantasy, or so I deduce from "designed-virus stuff."
And I wasn't "blaming the US." as a matter of fact I am not blaming anyone. I was saying IF someone else adheres to the lab leak theory THEN that other person holds the less anti-Chinese of the two possible views. It is hard to see how to conduct a rational conversation with someone who gets from there, to where you are.
And, politely, my childrens' medical records are off limits.
"You don't seem to understand anything about any of this." Well, I'd argue that's an indication of your lack of perception.
"And, politely, my childrens' medical records are off limits"
And that's fair enough. But if you didn't give your kids the MMR vaccine for non-medical reasons, then you are a shit. An absolute shit who does not care for his kids. But as you do care for your kids, I'd assume that you gave them the MMR jab,
And as that's the case, why trust JFK on anything?
"A striking still-life fresco resembling a pizza has been found among the ruins of ancient Pompeii... and includes one item that looks suspiciously like a pineapple."
Did you bother to even read that article before you posted it?
"Fish fingers are still a good way to get the wary to eat fish. After Birds Eye developed fish fingers, it created the tagline “no bones, no waste, no smell, no fuss” and that still holds. So what else is in there? Nothing too odd, it seems."
Which part of 65% fish did you fail to understand?
from the article
"There’s not a lot of fish in fingers compared to a full-size fillet, but they are an easy way to have fish. The only question for Captain Birds Eye now is whether to fry or grill them."
Where does it say less than 65% fish?
Edit: I'd like to apologise Pagan. It may not say anything about 65% in the article but I've just checked the Waitrose website for Bird's Eye Cod fish fingers...
Birds eye it says "Birds Eye’s box of 18 fish fingers uses just 58 per cent fish but keep reading the ingredients "
and here "Dunnes’ Alaskan Pollock fish fingers have 65 per cent fish fillet"
Yes, they have a coating, that's not exactly a secret.
The coating is thin and forms much less than 20% of a fishfinger. Sorry processed food is basically crap and even 58% cod is probably a large portion of stuff you wouldnt expect in a fillet of cod just like most beefburgers will contain lips, testicles etc.
Which of the ingredients is it you are objecting to?
PB lefties and loons and persons-of-the-tiny-pecker-commminity (Aka @JosiasJessop and @kinabalu) must have an entire portfolio of questions I can lob at him over the lobster claws
I was warming to you today Leon, but that is really a very sad post and you linked to a conspiracy site also. Will you be staring into his eyes all evening?
He is just having a rothchild cigarette with his dinner probably
"the absence of evidence for a lab leak, and in the presence of evidence for the market as the source" is mere fantasy. To believe it you have to believe that circumstantial evidence is conclusive in favour of the market and inadmissible in favour of the lab, and to ignore the huge debate about whether the furin cleavage site is likely to have arisen in nature.
The evidence for the market is not circumstantial. The early cases were clustered around the market. Environmental analyses found the virus in the market. That there were two initial strains of SARS-COV-2 is consistent with a reservoir of infected animals in the market.
It is, if course, entirely possible for the wet market to be both the focal point, and it to have been a lab leak.
That., of course, it almost certainly what happened. Leaked in the lab - the CDC more likely than the WIV - simply because of proximity - 300 metres away. Infected but pre-symptomatic lab worker went from the CDC to the market to buy a chicken. Bingo. Superspreader event, clustered around the market
It's not obvious to me.
Wild -> lab -> market is plausible and you assert that the wild -> lab bit was happening (and I have no reason to disbelieve this) but the lab -> market bit still requires some lapses that are fairly rare and the timing has to be just right (they do happen, it is certainly possible)
Wild -> market is also plausible and while you assert that wild -> animal in market is unlikely (and again I have no reason to disbelieve) there's also potential for a chain of transmission through animals (or containers, surfaces, air) to market or even indeed a person infected elsewhere (not from lab, closer to large populations of bats) taking it to the market.
I don't see a strong reason to favour one of those over the other, on the available evidence.
If the outbreak had happened in any other city in China, then a purely zoonotic origin would be the most likely scenario. That it happened in the same city where bat diseases were being actively studied skews the probabilities the other way around.
Most large Chinese cities have labs studying coronaviruses. If you're worried about zoonotic infections in China, you're looking at bat diseases. So, if the outbreak had happened in any other city in China, there's a high chance there would have been a similar lab.
This doesn't seem to be true. The number of BSL-4 labs in China is very small.
And a lab leak can come from a BSL-3 lab. After all, WCDC is not BSL-4 lab, and that's the one Leon is most animated about. If it was artificially manipulated, then the odds change. If it was a natural sample leaked (which is where the focus now lies), then it's any BSL-3 lab or higher.
(Edited - BSL-3)
The CDC was, I believe, operating at BSL 2
That's why Jeremy Farrar's first reaction, on hearing about Covid, was that the lab work in China was "like the Wild West". He also believed it probably came from the lab
Yet weirdly enough about six minutes after writing that email he signed a letter to the Lancet calling "lab leak" a baseless conspiracy theory
Funny, huh
Proof that some of this terrifying bat research was done at BSL2 level (I reckon this is the Wuhan CDC they are talking about)
"In EHA-led work conducted in Wuhan, scientists infected humanized mice with engineered novel bat coronaviruses in a BSL-3 facility, according to grant documents EHA submitted to the NIH. Some collection and engineering of bat coronaviruses were done in a BSL-2, with less stringent protocols and containment, according to multiple sources including a paper in the Journal of Virology ."
I always find it's good to look at the home page of any linked website I'm not familiar with. This one looks... interesting.
It has header sections including "Bill Gates", "Pesticides" and "ultra-processed foods"
Which *really* set my spider-senses tingling.
Fuck, yeah, why are they worried abour "Pesticides" and "Ultra-processed foods"???
What a bunch of cranks
You are a dangerous fool. Your sort of sh*t is exactly how people get dragged into cults and misinformation black holes.
And how does "Bill Gates" fit into your thinking?
No idea. Anyway I've just given you THE TIMES and Jeremy Farrar as an alternative source for the exact same information. So you can put away your angry little pecker of outrage
Exactly. You don't think. You are almost uniquely incapable of thought. Thought, to you, is just which sad girl will accept the least money for you to wait hours for the blue pills to take effect. Your brain is the nearest humanity has found to a vacuum. Scientists are examining your skull to see how something so thin can withstand a 1atm pressure difference.
Why am I reacting this way? You're going through the lableak hypothesis because it's dramatic. Because lots of people died, and you think blaming the Chinese is cool.
RFK Jr is involved with that website, and if you cared one jot for people, then he would be one person you would run a mile from. You would spit in his face. You would throw rotten tomatoes at him in the stocks. RFK Jr was one of the key people spreading MMR disinformation, hence harming efforts to stop the spread of those diseases, and harming vaccination as a whole.
*If* you had a conscience, you would eat pizzas with pineapple for the next week to make amends.
But you don't have a conscience.
Look, I get you’ve got a weird crush on me. But please. Some decorum
I'll leave the 'weird crushes' to you.
But please understand my point wrt JFK Jr: he is a shit. An evil shit. This is nothing to do with politics; just to do with the 'causes' he has built his political following on, and ones you unthinkingly promote.
Please, please, please, check your sources.
Yeah, but look at his 6 pack. Leon has been known to go a bit strange in the presence of strong men.
"A striking still-life fresco resembling a pizza has been found among the ruins of ancient Pompeii... and includes one item that looks suspiciously like a pineapple."
Did you bother to even read that article before you posted it?
"Fish fingers are still a good way to get the wary to eat fish. After Birds Eye developed fish fingers, it created the tagline “no bones, no waste, no smell, no fuss” and that still holds. So what else is in there? Nothing too odd, it seems."
Which part of 65% fish did you fail to understand?
from the article
"There’s not a lot of fish in fingers compared to a full-size fillet, but they are an easy way to have fish. The only question for Captain Birds Eye now is whether to fry or grill them."
Where does it say less than 65% fish?
Edit: I'd like to apologise Pagan. It may not say anything about 65% in the article but I've just checked the Waitrose website for Bird's Eye Cod fish fingers...
Birds eye it says "Birds Eye’s box of 18 fish fingers uses just 58 per cent fish but keep reading the ingredients "
and here "Dunnes’ Alaskan Pollock fish fingers have 65 per cent fish fillet"
Yes, they have a coating, that's not exactly a secret.
The coating is thin and forms much less than 20% of a fishfinger. Sorry processed food is basically crap and even 58% cod is probably a large portion of stuff you wouldnt expect in a fillet of cod just like most beefburgers will contain lips, testicles etc.
Which of the ingredients is it you are objecting to?
I am saying the definition of fish is not one most would willingly eat....just like the definition of beef is wide in beefburgers which certainly arent minced steak for example but contain a lot of minced parts that you couldn't persuade people to buy
"the absence of evidence for a lab leak, and in the presence of evidence for the market as the source" is mere fantasy. To believe it you have to believe that circumstantial evidence is conclusive in favour of the market and inadmissible in favour of the lab, and to ignore the huge debate about whether the furin cleavage site is likely to have arisen in nature.
The evidence for the market is not circumstantial. The early cases were clustered around the market. Environmental analyses found the virus in the market. That there were two initial strains of SARS-COV-2 is consistent with a reservoir of infected animals in the market.
It is, if course, entirely possible for the wet market to be both the focal point, and it to have been a lab leak.
That., of course, it almost certainly what happened. Leaked in the lab - the CDC more likely than the WIV - simply because of proximity - 300 metres away. Infected but pre-symptomatic lab worker went from the CDC to the market to buy a chicken. Bingo. Superspreader event, clustered around the market
It's not obvious to me.
Wild -> lab -> market is plausible and you assert that the wild -> lab bit was happening (and I have no reason to disbelieve this) but the lab -> market bit still requires some lapses that are fairly rare and the timing has to be just right (they do happen, it is certainly possible)
Wild -> market is also plausible and while you assert that wild -> animal in market is unlikely (and again I have no reason to disbelieve) there's also potential for a chain of transmission through animals (or containers, surfaces, air) to market or even indeed a person infected elsewhere (not from lab, closer to large populations of bats) taking it to the market.
I don't see a strong reason to favour one of those over the other, on the available evidence.
If the outbreak had happened in any other city in China, then a purely zoonotic origin would be the most likely scenario. That it happened in the same city where bat diseases were being actively studied skews the probabilities the other way around.
Most large Chinese cities have labs studying coronaviruses. If you're worried about zoonotic infections in China, you're looking at bat diseases. So, if the outbreak had happened in any other city in China, there's a high chance there would have been a similar lab.
This doesn't seem to be true. The number of BSL-4 labs in China is very small.
And a lab leak can come from a BSL-3 lab. After all, WCDC is not BSL-4 lab, and that's the one Leon is most animated about. If it was artificially manipulated, then the odds change. If it was a natural sample leaked (which is where the focus now lies), then it's any BSL-3 lab or higher.
(Edited - BSL-3)
The CDC was, I believe, operating at BSL 2
That's why Jeremy Farrar's first reaction, on hearing about Covid, was that the lab work in China was "like the Wild West". He also believed it probably came from the lab
Yet weirdly enough about six minutes after writing that email he signed a letter to the Lancet calling "lab leak" a baseless conspiracy theory
Funny, huh
Proof that some of this terrifying bat research was done at BSL2 level (I reckon this is the Wuhan CDC they are talking about)
"In EHA-led work conducted in Wuhan, scientists infected humanized mice with engineered novel bat coronaviruses in a BSL-3 facility, according to grant documents EHA submitted to the NIH. Some collection and engineering of bat coronaviruses were done in a BSL-2, with less stringent protocols and containment, according to multiple sources including a paper in the Journal of Virology ."
I always find it's good to look at the home page of any linked website I'm not familiar with. This one looks... interesting.
It has header sections including "Bill Gates", "Pesticides" and "ultra-processed foods"
Which *really* set my spider-senses tingling.
Fuck, yeah, why are they worried abour "Pesticides" and "Ultra-processed foods"???
What a bunch of cranks
You are a dangerous fool. Your sort of sh*t is exactly how people get dragged into cults and misinformation black holes.
And how does "Bill Gates" fit into your thinking?
No idea. Anyway I've just given you THE TIMES and Jeremy Farrar as an alternative source for the exact same information. So you can put away your angry little pecker of outrage
Exactly. You don't think. You are almost uniquely incapable of thought. Thought, to you, is just which sad girl will accept the least money for you to wait hours for the blue pills to take effect. Your brain is the nearest humanity has found to a vacuum. Scientists are examining your skull to see how something so thin can withstand a 1atm pressure difference.
Why am I reacting this way? You're going through the lableak hypothesis because it's dramatic. Because lots of people died, and you think blaming the Chinese is cool.
RFK Jr is involved with that website, and if you cared one jot for people, then he would be one person you would run a mile from. You would spit in his face. You would throw rotten tomatoes at him in the stocks. RFK Jr was one of the key people spreading MMR disinformation, hence harming efforts to stop the spread of those diseases, and harming vaccination as a whole.
*If* you had a conscience, you would eat pizzas with pineapple for the next week to make amends.
But you don't have a conscience.
Look, I get you’ve got a weird crush on me. But please. Some decorum
I'll leave the 'weird crushes' to you.
But please understand my point wrt JFK Jr: he is a shit. An evil shit. This is nothing to do with politics; just to do with the 'causes' he has built his political following on, and ones you unthinkingly promote.
Please, please, please, check your sources.
Yeah, but look at his 6 pack. Leon has been known to go a bit strange in the presence of strong men.
Is a six pack an essential for a POTUS? Asking for a fat orange friend?
"A striking still-life fresco resembling a pizza has been found among the ruins of ancient Pompeii... and includes one item that looks suspiciously like a pineapple."
Did you bother to even read that article before you posted it?
"Fish fingers are still a good way to get the wary to eat fish. After Birds Eye developed fish fingers, it created the tagline “no bones, no waste, no smell, no fuss” and that still holds. So what else is in there? Nothing too odd, it seems."
Which part of 65% fish did you fail to understand?
from the article
"There’s not a lot of fish in fingers compared to a full-size fillet, but they are an easy way to have fish. The only question for Captain Birds Eye now is whether to fry or grill them."
Where does it say less than 65% fish?
Edit: I'd like to apologise Pagan. It may not say anything about 65% in the article but I've just checked the Waitrose website for Bird's Eye Cod fish fingers...
Birds eye it says "Birds Eye’s box of 18 fish fingers uses just 58 per cent fish but keep reading the ingredients "
and here "Dunnes’ Alaskan Pollock fish fingers have 65 per cent fish fillet"
Yes, they have a coating, that's not exactly a secret.
The coating is thin and forms much less than 20% of a fishfinger. Sorry processed food is basically crap and even 58% cod is probably a large portion of stuff you wouldnt expect in a fillet of cod just like most beefburgers will contain lips, testicles etc.
Which of the ingredients is it you are objecting to?
I am saying the definition of fish is not one most would willingly eat....just like the definition of beef is wide in beefburgers which certainly arent minced steak for example but contain a lot of minced parts that you couldn't persuade people to buy
So when they say it is 100% fillet you are convinced they are lying? Rather than being concerned about the fish %?
"A striking still-life fresco resembling a pizza has been found among the ruins of ancient Pompeii... and includes one item that looks suspiciously like a pineapple."
Did you bother to even read that article before you posted it?
"Fish fingers are still a good way to get the wary to eat fish. After Birds Eye developed fish fingers, it created the tagline “no bones, no waste, no smell, no fuss” and that still holds. So what else is in there? Nothing too odd, it seems."
Which part of 65% fish did you fail to understand?
from the article
"There’s not a lot of fish in fingers compared to a full-size fillet, but they are an easy way to have fish. The only question for Captain Birds Eye now is whether to fry or grill them."
Where does it say less than 65% fish?
Edit: I'd like to apologise Pagan. It may not say anything about 65% in the article but I've just checked the Waitrose website for Bird's Eye Cod fish fingers...
Birds eye it says "Birds Eye’s box of 18 fish fingers uses just 58 per cent fish but keep reading the ingredients "
and here "Dunnes’ Alaskan Pollock fish fingers have 65 per cent fish fillet"
Yes, they have a coating, that's not exactly a secret.
The coating is thin and forms much less than 20% of a fishfinger. Sorry processed food is basically crap and even 58% cod is probably a large portion of stuff you wouldnt expect in a fillet of cod just like most beefburgers will contain lips, testicles etc.
The coating is geometrically both wider and longer than the fish so its not just about thickness.
2 year UK gilt now at 5.24% new 15 year high, half a %age point above post mini budget peak. markets now see 70% chance of rates over 6% by end of year…
I posted yesterday that there is no alternative to the policies of Sunak and Hunt and this is hard, very hard
The last property crisis lasted from 1991 to 2001 and there is every reason to believe this could be similar
I would gently remind folks that the 1976 labour government's financial crisis needed the intervention of the IMF with big cuts in public spending, let's hope we are not on the same course today
BoE is supposed to handle inflation and they have failed utterly.
2% target?
WTF.
Liz Truss was right in the first place that the monetary policy framework needs to be looked at again. Depoliticised CPI targetting was a superficially attractive policy but has been one of the root causes of two major crises in a row.
It just means the BOE (and every other quango for that matter) takes their cue from whatever junket that they last attended rather than from the UK Government.
And BigG is completely wrong about there not being an alternative, the alternative is to drive down the cost of energy by increasing the supply of it. This is an energy cost-driven inflation. It has bugger all to do with a consumer-driven boom. It is completely bizarre that commentators are bemoaning how rich they think everyone is in the UK at the moment.
Serious question: how much actual effect on energy supply do you think the government could have if they chose?
@Luckyguy1983 supports fracking, development of coal, and most everything that is politically impossible to achieve including no doubt abolishing net zero which is classic right wing politics at present
I know, and none of those things will make any significant impact on global energy supplies - unlike further investment in renewables which bizarrely he is against.
Horseshit. I am massively supportive of a huge investment in tidal, because tidal is a classic investment - an initial outlay with the pay off of relatively cheap, dependable power on a more or less indefinite basis. I am against further 'investment' (if chucking subsidy money at overseas wealth funds can be considered an investment) in wind and solar, because they will never provide cheap or dependable power, which RCS, with his industry experience has acknowledged, and you would know if you bothered to educate yourself beyond agreeing with Keir Starmer's platitudes.
As for 'politically impossible', Germany is subject to exactly the same external political pressures as we are (possibly more due to the EU), yet they are razing towns to dig coal mines because they refuse to offshore their economy and impoverish their people - that's the bottom line. Sadly our useless excuse for a Government doesn't have a bottom line.
As for Net Zero, I am not for abandoning it (though any elected Government should reserve the right to do so), I am for finding creative ways to meet the target (such as dressing fields with rock dust) that don't involve taking our economy back to the dark ages. And if necessary, being prepared to miss the target if it proves incompatible with economical survival. You will find this approach is very unpopular with proponents of Net Zero, who are worried that other ways of meeting the target may be found and people may be allowed to continue their 'high carbon lifestyles' - because control over peoples' lifestyles was the whole point.
Tidal energy is sensible, but decades away
Solar is productive and certainly our panels are excellent, and as far as wind is concerned investment is supported across the parties save maybe Tice and RefUK
You are not remotely realistic if you think the UK will follow Germany in coal, but then you support Truss so being unrealistic comes with the territory
You are going to have to come to terms with Starmer, PM, as it is happening and frankly to this conservative it will be a relief when he takes over what will be the ultimate hospital pass
Tidal doesn't need to be decades away, it is old tech - dams. It makes total sense, and is a measure of how bad our deeply dysfunctional political and administrative class has got that it hasn't broken ground already. And I hold Truss just as responsible as she had no plans to revive the project either.
Wind can never be economical. We can, at best, soften its negative impact on energy costs by altering the subsidy system to ensure all excess power is stored.
If you don't think a Government that is prepared to risk being tutted at globally to serve the national interest is 'realistic' you have a very low opinion of UK politics. Perhaps you are right, but I am an optimist.
"A striking still-life fresco resembling a pizza has been found among the ruins of ancient Pompeii... and includes one item that looks suspiciously like a pineapple."
Did you bother to even read that article before you posted it?
"Fish fingers are still a good way to get the wary to eat fish. After Birds Eye developed fish fingers, it created the tagline “no bones, no waste, no smell, no fuss” and that still holds. So what else is in there? Nothing too odd, it seems."
Which part of 65% fish did you fail to understand?
from the article
"There’s not a lot of fish in fingers compared to a full-size fillet, but they are an easy way to have fish. The only question for Captain Birds Eye now is whether to fry or grill them."
Duh. Because a fair proportion of it is batter! I'm not here to defend fish fingers, which are mundane food at best, but your staunch opposition to them seems... a little weird.
@rcs1000 I've been meaning to ask you a follow up question to one I asked you a while back. It was about whether we had the generation capacity to charge up 3m cars every night
What about freight, and plant and farm machinery? Surely we're going to have to seriously increase our generation to satisfy that demand?
The most immediate movement we seem to have coming on generation capacity is downward: we have to 'Just Stop' burning fossil fuels
I know that we have loads more windfarms coming on stream over the next few years (if we can get the parts to finish them), but wind isn't reliable enough to be our main source of energy without a huge increase in storage capacity
I've read a lot of comments saying that having car batteries solves the problem of storage. I reckon at most it would mitigate it a little; How would people travel when the wind hadn't blown? And how much could you usefully store in cars beyond travel needs?
We need to build huge amounts of energy storage and we need to start now
"What about freight, and plant and farm machinery?"
JCB are going heavily into green hydrogen. And whilst this has the electric-only lobby fainting, it can may make sense for mobile machinery that requires really long duty cycles. It may only be a minor part of the solution to the environmental problem, but it may be a part.
"A striking still-life fresco resembling a pizza has been found among the ruins of ancient Pompeii... and includes one item that looks suspiciously like a pineapple."
Did you bother to even read that article before you posted it?
"Fish fingers are still a good way to get the wary to eat fish. After Birds Eye developed fish fingers, it created the tagline “no bones, no waste, no smell, no fuss” and that still holds. So what else is in there? Nothing too odd, it seems."
Which part of 65% fish did you fail to understand?
from the article
"There’s not a lot of fish in fingers compared to a full-size fillet, but they are an easy way to have fish. The only question for Captain Birds Eye now is whether to fry or grill them."
Where does it say less than 65% fish?
Edit: I'd like to apologise Pagan. It may not say anything about 65% in the article but I've just checked the Waitrose website for Bird's Eye Cod fish fingers...
Birds eye it says "Birds Eye’s box of 18 fish fingers uses just 58 per cent fish but keep reading the ingredients "
and here "Dunnes’ Alaskan Pollock fish fingers have 65 per cent fish fillet"
Yes, they have a coating, that's not exactly a secret.
The coating is thin and forms much less than 20% of a fishfinger. Sorry processed food is basically crap and even 58% cod is probably a large portion of stuff you wouldnt expect in a fillet of cod just like most beefburgers will contain lips, testicles etc.
Which of the ingredients is it you are objecting to?
I am saying the definition of fish is not one most would willingly eat....just like the definition of beef is wide in beefburgers which certainly arent minced steak for example but contain a lot of minced parts that you couldn't persuade people to buy
So when they say it is 100% fillet you are convinced they are lying? Rather than being concerned about the fish %?
I trust food companies not to lie rather less than I trust Liz truss to be competent frankly, you want to trust them go right ahead
"the absence of evidence for a lab leak, and in the presence of evidence for the market as the source" is mere fantasy. To believe it you have to believe that circumstantial evidence is conclusive in favour of the market and inadmissible in favour of the lab, and to ignore the huge debate about whether the furin cleavage site is likely to have arisen in nature.
The evidence for the market is not circumstantial. The early cases were clustered around the market. Environmental analyses found the virus in the market. That there were two initial strains of SARS-COV-2 is consistent with a reservoir of infected animals in the market.
It is, if course, entirely possible for the wet market to be both the focal point, and it to have been a lab leak.
That., of course, it almost certainly what happened. Leaked in the lab - the CDC more likely than the WIV - simply because of proximity - 300 metres away. Infected but pre-symptomatic lab worker went from the CDC to the market to buy a chicken. Bingo. Superspreader event, clustered around the market
It's not obvious to me.
Wild -> lab -> market is plausible and you assert that the wild -> lab bit was happening (and I have no reason to disbelieve this) but the lab -> market bit still requires some lapses that are fairly rare and the timing has to be just right (they do happen, it is certainly possible)
Wild -> market is also plausible and while you assert that wild -> animal in market is unlikely (and again I have no reason to disbelieve) there's also potential for a chain of transmission through animals (or containers, surfaces, air) to market or even indeed a person infected elsewhere (not from lab, closer to large populations of bats) taking it to the market.
I don't see a strong reason to favour one of those over the other, on the available evidence.
If the outbreak had happened in any other city in China, then a purely zoonotic origin would be the most likely scenario. That it happened in the same city where bat diseases were being actively studied skews the probabilities the other way around.
Most large Chinese cities have labs studying coronaviruses. If you're worried about zoonotic infections in China, you're looking at bat diseases. So, if the outbreak had happened in any other city in China, there's a high chance there would have been a similar lab.
This doesn't seem to be true. The number of BSL-4 labs in China is very small.
And a lab leak can come from a BSL-3 lab. After all, WCDC is not BSL-4 lab, and that's the one Leon is most animated about. If it was artificially manipulated, then the odds change. If it was a natural sample leaked (which is where the focus now lies), then it's any BSL-3 lab or higher.
(Edited - BSL-3)
The CDC was, I believe, operating at BSL 2
That's why Jeremy Farrar's first reaction, on hearing about Covid, was that the lab work in China was "like the Wild West". He also believed it probably came from the lab
Yet weirdly enough about six minutes after writing that email he signed a letter to the Lancet calling "lab leak" a baseless conspiracy theory
Funny, huh
Proof that some of this terrifying bat research was done at BSL2 level (I reckon this is the Wuhan CDC they are talking about)
"In EHA-led work conducted in Wuhan, scientists infected humanized mice with engineered novel bat coronaviruses in a BSL-3 facility, according to grant documents EHA submitted to the NIH. Some collection and engineering of bat coronaviruses were done in a BSL-2, with less stringent protocols and containment, according to multiple sources including a paper in the Journal of Virology ."
I always find it's good to look at the home page of any linked website I'm not familiar with. This one looks... interesting.
It has header sections including "Bill Gates", "Pesticides" and "ultra-processed foods"
Which *really* set my spider-senses tingling.
Fuck, yeah, why are they worried abour "Pesticides" and "Ultra-processed foods"???
What a bunch of cranks
You are a dangerous fool. Your sort of sh*t is exactly how people get dragged into cults and misinformation black holes.
And how does "Bill Gates" fit into your thinking?
No idea. Anyway I've just given you THE TIMES and Jeremy Farrar as an alternative source for the exact same information. So you can put away your angry little pecker of outrage
Exactly. You don't think. You are almost uniquely incapable of thought. Thought, to you, is just which sad girl will accept the least money for you to wait hours for the blue pills to take effect. Your brain is the nearest humanity has found to a vacuum. Scientists are examining your skull to see how something so thin can withstand a 1atm pressure difference.
Why am I reacting this way? You're going through the lableak hypothesis because it's dramatic. Because lots of people died, and you think blaming the Chinese is cool.
RFK Jr is involved with that website, and if you cared one jot for people, then he would be one person you would run a mile from. You would spit in his face. You would throw rotten tomatoes at him in the stocks. RFK Jr was one of the key people spreading MMR disinformation, hence harming efforts to stop the spread of those diseases, and harming vaccination as a whole.
*If* you had a conscience, you would eat pizzas with pineapple for the next week to make amends.
But you don't have a conscience.
The merits of most sorts of theory are pretty much independent of the morals of the people adhering to it. Hitler was probably a convinced heliocentric.
Industrial accidents with dire consequences are commonplace and not really that exciting, I would not have thought. Bhopal - the Movie may exist, but it'll be a downbeat documentary.
And most importantly, lab leak is the least Chinese-blamey game in town by a country mile. US Big Science was balls deep in the gain of function nonsense, whereas wet markets is 100% the inscrutable oriental.
Three points for Godwinning yourself. One point for missing the point. A zillion points for getting blame-the-US in the conversation.
Do you have kids? Did they get the MMR jab?
*Of course* lab leak is Chinese-blamey game - especially as it often leads onto the designed-virus stuff.
You don't understand what "Godwin" means. It is widely understood and easily googled. Have a go.
What it doesn't mean, is using someone universally recognised as very evil, as an example of someone very evil. I can't see the problem with that, so please elucidate?
You don't seem to understand anything about any of this. Gain of function research is a recognised, mainstream, practice. You seem to think it is a sort of 4chan fantasy, or so I deduce from "designed-virus stuff."
And I wasn't "blaming the US." as a matter of fact I am not blaming anyone. I was saying IF someone else adheres to the lab leak theory THEN that other person holds the less anti-Chinese of the two possible views. It is hard to see how to conduct a rational conversation with someone who gets from there, to where you are.
And, politely, my childrens' medical records are off limits.
"You don't seem to understand anything about any of this." Well, I'd argue that's an indication of your lack of perception.
"And, politely, my childrens' medical records are off limits"
And that's fair enough. But if you didn't give your kids the MMR vaccine for non-medical reasons, then you are a shit. An absolute shit who does not care for his kids. But as you do care for your kids, I'd assume that you gave them the MMR jab,
And as that's the case, why trust JFK on anything?
I don't "trust JFK" on this because he is dead, and if you mean "RFK jr" I hadn't heard of him before today. From what I have seen, he was quoted purely as relaying academically reliable sources. I won't trigger you again by referring to hitler, but if Pol Pot wrote a paper referring to Darwin on the OOS, how badly damaging would that be to the theory of ebns?
as to the link: congrats! you have googled, read and completely misunderstood probably the simplest article anywhere in wp. Well done.
"A striking still-life fresco resembling a pizza has been found among the ruins of ancient Pompeii... and includes one item that looks suspiciously like a pineapple."
Did you bother to even read that article before you posted it?
"Fish fingers are still a good way to get the wary to eat fish. After Birds Eye developed fish fingers, it created the tagline “no bones, no waste, no smell, no fuss” and that still holds. So what else is in there? Nothing too odd, it seems."
Which part of 65% fish did you fail to understand?
from the article
"There’s not a lot of fish in fingers compared to a full-size fillet, but they are an easy way to have fish. The only question for Captain Birds Eye now is whether to fry or grill them."
Where does it say less than 65% fish?
Edit: I'd like to apologise Pagan. It may not say anything about 65% in the article but I've just checked the Waitrose website for Bird's Eye Cod fish fingers...
"A striking still-life fresco resembling a pizza has been found among the ruins of ancient Pompeii... and includes one item that looks suspiciously like a pineapple."
Did you bother to even read that article before you posted it?
"Fish fingers are still a good way to get the wary to eat fish. After Birds Eye developed fish fingers, it created the tagline “no bones, no waste, no smell, no fuss” and that still holds. So what else is in there? Nothing too odd, it seems."
Which part of 65% fish did you fail to understand?
from the article
"There’s not a lot of fish in fingers compared to a full-size fillet, but they are an easy way to have fish. The only question for Captain Birds Eye now is whether to fry or grill them."
Duh. Because a fair proportion of it is batter! I'm not here to defend fish fingers, which are mundane food at best, but your staunch opposition to them seems... a little weird.
Fish finger sandwich with mayo in place of butter is an absolute classic. Loved it since my student days. A bit carbon heavy, but hits the spot.
"A striking still-life fresco resembling a pizza has been found among the ruins of ancient Pompeii... and includes one item that looks suspiciously like a pineapple."
Did you bother to even read that article before you posted it?
"Fish fingers are still a good way to get the wary to eat fish. After Birds Eye developed fish fingers, it created the tagline “no bones, no waste, no smell, no fuss” and that still holds. So what else is in there? Nothing too odd, it seems."
Which part of 65% fish did you fail to understand?
from the article
"There’s not a lot of fish in fingers compared to a full-size fillet, but they are an easy way to have fish. The only question for Captain Birds Eye now is whether to fry or grill them."
Where does it say less than 65% fish?
Edit: I'd like to apologise Pagan. It may not say anything about 65% in the article but I've just checked the Waitrose website for Bird's Eye Cod fish fingers...
"the absence of evidence for a lab leak, and in the presence of evidence for the market as the source" is mere fantasy. To believe it you have to believe that circumstantial evidence is conclusive in favour of the market and inadmissible in favour of the lab, and to ignore the huge debate about whether the furin cleavage site is likely to have arisen in nature.
The evidence for the market is not circumstantial. The early cases were clustered around the market. Environmental analyses found the virus in the market. That there were two initial strains of SARS-COV-2 is consistent with a reservoir of infected animals in the market.
It is, if course, entirely possible for the wet market to be both the focal point, and it to have been a lab leak.
That., of course, it almost certainly what happened. Leaked in the lab - the CDC more likely than the WIV - simply because of proximity - 300 metres away. Infected but pre-symptomatic lab worker went from the CDC to the market to buy a chicken. Bingo. Superspreader event, clustered around the market
It's not obvious to me.
Wild -> lab -> market is plausible and you assert that the wild -> lab bit was happening (and I have no reason to disbelieve this) but the lab -> market bit still requires some lapses that are fairly rare and the timing has to be just right (they do happen, it is certainly possible)
Wild -> market is also plausible and while you assert that wild -> animal in market is unlikely (and again I have no reason to disbelieve) there's also potential for a chain of transmission through animals (or containers, surfaces, air) to market or even indeed a person infected elsewhere (not from lab, closer to large populations of bats) taking it to the market.
I don't see a strong reason to favour one of those over the other, on the available evidence.
If the outbreak had happened in any other city in China, then a purely zoonotic origin would be the most likely scenario. That it happened in the same city where bat diseases were being actively studied skews the probabilities the other way around.
Most large Chinese cities have labs studying coronaviruses. If you're worried about zoonotic infections in China, you're looking at bat diseases. So, if the outbreak had happened in any other city in China, there's a high chance there would have been a similar lab.
This doesn't seem to be true. The number of BSL-4 labs in China is very small.
And a lab leak can come from a BSL-3 lab. After all, WCDC is not BSL-4 lab, and that's the one Leon is most animated about. If it was artificially manipulated, then the odds change. If it was a natural sample leaked (which is where the focus now lies), then it's any BSL-3 lab or higher.
(Edited - BSL-3)
The CDC was, I believe, operating at BSL 2
That's why Jeremy Farrar's first reaction, on hearing about Covid, was that the lab work in China was "like the Wild West". He also believed it probably came from the lab
Yet weirdly enough about six minutes after writing that email he signed a letter to the Lancet calling "lab leak" a baseless conspiracy theory
Funny, huh
Proof that some of this terrifying bat research was done at BSL2 level (I reckon this is the Wuhan CDC they are talking about)
"In EHA-led work conducted in Wuhan, scientists infected humanized mice with engineered novel bat coronaviruses in a BSL-3 facility, according to grant documents EHA submitted to the NIH. Some collection and engineering of bat coronaviruses were done in a BSL-2, with less stringent protocols and containment, according to multiple sources including a paper in the Journal of Virology ."
I always find it's good to look at the home page of any linked website I'm not familiar with. This one looks... interesting.
It has header sections including "Bill Gates", "Pesticides" and "ultra-processed foods"
Which *really* set my spider-senses tingling.
Fuck, yeah, why are they worried abour "Pesticides" and "Ultra-processed foods"???
What a bunch of cranks
You are a dangerous fool. Your sort of sh*t is exactly how people get dragged into cults and misinformation black holes.
And how does "Bill Gates" fit into your thinking?
No idea. Anyway I've just given you THE TIMES and Jeremy Farrar as an alternative source for the exact same information. So you can put away your angry little pecker of outrage
Exactly. You don't think. You are almost uniquely incapable of thought. Thought, to you, is just which sad girl will accept the least money for you to wait hours for the blue pills to take effect. Your brain is the nearest humanity has found to a vacuum. Scientists are examining your skull to see how something so thin can withstand a 1atm pressure difference.
Why am I reacting this way? You're going through the lableak hypothesis because it's dramatic. Because lots of people died, and you think blaming the Chinese is cool.
RFK Jr is involved with that website, and if you cared one jot for people, then he would be one person you would run a mile from. You would spit in his face. You would throw rotten tomatoes at him in the stocks. RFK Jr was one of the key people spreading MMR disinformation, hence harming efforts to stop the spread of those diseases, and harming vaccination as a whole.
*If* you had a conscience, you would eat pizzas with pineapple for the next week to make amends.
But you don't have a conscience.
The merits of most sorts of theory are pretty much independent of the morals of the people adhering to it. Hitler was probably a convinced heliocentric.
Industrial accidents with dire consequences are commonplace and not really that exciting, I would not have thought. Bhopal - the Movie may exist, but it'll be a downbeat documentary.
And most importantly, lab leak is the least Chinese-blamey game in town by a country mile. US Big Science was balls deep in the gain of function nonsense, whereas wet markets is 100% the inscrutable oriental.
Three points for Godwinning yourself. One point for missing the point. A zillion points for getting blame-the-US in the conversation.
Do you have kids? Did they get the MMR jab?
*Of course* lab leak is Chinese-blamey game - especially as it often leads onto the designed-virus stuff.
You don't understand what "Godwin" means. It is widely understood and easily googled. Have a go.
What it doesn't mean, is using someone universally recognised as very evil, as an example of someone very evil. I can't see the problem with that, so please elucidate?
You don't seem to understand anything about any of this. Gain of function research is a recognised, mainstream, practice. You seem to think it is a sort of 4chan fantasy, or so I deduce from "designed-virus stuff."
And I wasn't "blaming the US." as a matter of fact I am not blaming anyone. I was saying IF someone else adheres to the lab leak theory THEN that other person holds the less anti-Chinese of the two possible views. It is hard to see how to conduct a rational conversation with someone who gets from there, to where you are.
And, politely, my childrens' medical records are off limits.
"You don't seem to understand anything about any of this." Well, I'd argue that's an indication of your lack of perception.
"And, politely, my childrens' medical records are off limits"
And that's fair enough. But if you didn't give your kids the MMR vaccine for non-medical reasons, then you are a shit. An absolute shit who does not care for his kids. But as you do care for your kids, I'd assume that you gave them the MMR jab,
And as that's the case, why trust JFK on anything?
I don't "trust JFK" on this because he is dead, and if you mean "RFK jr" I hadn't heard of him before today. From what I have seen, he was quoted purely as relaying academically reliable sources. I won't trigger you again by referring to hitler, but if Pol Pot wrote a paper referring to Darwin on the OOS, how badly damaging would that be to the theory of ebns?
as to the link: congrats! you have googled, read and completely misunderstood probably the simplest article anywhere in wp. Well done.
You're on a political website - this website - and you haven't heard of JFK Jr? The guy who threw his hat into the ring for President a while back?
"From what I have seen, he was quoted purely as relaying academically reliable sources."
"A striking still-life fresco resembling a pizza has been found among the ruins of ancient Pompeii... and includes one item that looks suspiciously like a pineapple."
Did you bother to even read that article before you posted it?
"Fish fingers are still a good way to get the wary to eat fish. After Birds Eye developed fish fingers, it created the tagline “no bones, no waste, no smell, no fuss” and that still holds. So what else is in there? Nothing too odd, it seems."
Which part of 65% fish did you fail to understand?
from the article
"There’s not a lot of fish in fingers compared to a full-size fillet, but they are an easy way to have fish. The only question for Captain Birds Eye now is whether to fry or grill them."
Where does it say less than 65% fish?
Edit: I'd like to apologise Pagan. It may not say anything about 65% in the article but I've just checked the Waitrose website for Bird's Eye Cod fish fingers...
Another overseas "investment" in British assets ends badly.
For 20+ years Boots has had 2 stores within 200 yards of each other in Darlington. Rationalizing examples like that should have been done years ago.
Boots has been aggressively buying formerly independent pharmacies and small chains for the aforementioned 20+ years. They were after market share, but now the NHS market has changed.
"A striking still-life fresco resembling a pizza has been found among the ruins of ancient Pompeii... and includes one item that looks suspiciously like a pineapple."
Did you bother to even read that article before you posted it?
"Fish fingers are still a good way to get the wary to eat fish. After Birds Eye developed fish fingers, it created the tagline “no bones, no waste, no smell, no fuss” and that still holds. So what else is in there? Nothing too odd, it seems."
Which part of 65% fish did you fail to understand?
from the article
"There’s not a lot of fish in fingers compared to a full-size fillet, but they are an easy way to have fish. The only question for Captain Birds Eye now is whether to fry or grill them."
Duh. Because a fair proportion of it is batter! I'm not here to defend fish fingers, which are mundane food at best, but your staunch opposition to them seems... a little weird.
You think 42% of a fish finger is breadcrumb? That just shows you are talking bollocked. Get a pack of fishfingers scrape the crumb off and weigh both....I do not believe for a moment the bread crumb scrapings will get anywhere near 42%.
"A striking still-life fresco resembling a pizza has been found among the ruins of ancient Pompeii... and includes one item that looks suspiciously like a pineapple."
Did you bother to even read that article before you posted it?
"Fish fingers are still a good way to get the wary to eat fish. After Birds Eye developed fish fingers, it created the tagline “no bones, no waste, no smell, no fuss” and that still holds. So what else is in there? Nothing too odd, it seems."
Which part of 65% fish did you fail to understand?
from the article
"There’s not a lot of fish in fingers compared to a full-size fillet, but they are an easy way to have fish. The only question for Captain Birds Eye now is whether to fry or grill them."
Where does it say less than 65% fish?
Edit: I'd like to apologise Pagan. It may not say anything about 65% in the article but I've just checked the Waitrose website for Bird's Eye Cod fish fingers...
Birds eye it says "Birds Eye’s box of 18 fish fingers uses just 58 per cent fish but keep reading the ingredients "
and here "Dunnes’ Alaskan Pollock fish fingers have 65 per cent fish fillet"
Yes, they have a coating, that's not exactly a secret.
The coating is thin and forms much less than 20% of a fishfinger. Sorry processed food is basically crap and even 58% cod is probably a large portion of stuff you wouldnt expect in a fillet of cod just like most beefburgers will contain lips, testicles etc.
Which of the ingredients is it you are objecting to?
I am saying the definition of fish is not one most would willingly eat....just like the definition of beef is wide in beefburgers which certainly arent minced steak for example but contain a lot of minced parts that you couldn't persuade people to buy
So when they say it is 100% fillet you are convinced they are lying? Rather than being concerned about the fish %?
I trust food companies not to lie rather less than I trust Liz truss to be competent frankly, you want to trust them go right ahead
Birds Eye chilli con carne had horsemeat in it instead of beef a decade or so ago, so sure these things happen and it would be foolish to trust them 100%. But equally it is kind of weird to be so convinced that they are particularly lying about fish finger ingredients rather than elsewhere in their range, probably occassionally and sporadically as things go wrong.
2 year UK gilt now at 5.24% new 15 year high, half a %age point above post mini budget peak. markets now see 70% chance of rates over 6% by end of year…
I posted yesterday that there is no alternative to the policies of Sunak and Hunt and this is hard, very hard
The last property crisis lasted from 1991 to 2001 and there is every reason to believe this could be similar
I would gently remind folks that the 1976 labour government's financial crisis needed the intervention of the IMF with big cuts in public spending, let's hope we are not on the same course today
BoE is supposed to handle inflation and they have failed utterly.
2% target?
WTF.
Liz Truss was right in the first place that the monetary policy framework needs to be looked at again. Depoliticised CPI targetting was a superficially attractive policy but has been one of the root causes of two major crises in a row.
It just means the BOE (and every other quango for that matter) takes their cue from whatever junket that they last attended rather than from the UK Government.
And BigG is completely wrong about there not being an alternative, the alternative is to drive down the cost of energy by increasing the supply of it. This is an energy cost-driven inflation. It has bugger all to do with a consumer-driven boom. It is completely bizarre that commentators are bemoaning how rich they think everyone is in the UK at the moment.
Serious question: how much actual effect on energy supply do you think the government could have if they chose?
@Luckyguy1983 supports fracking, development of coal, and most everything that is politically impossible to achieve including no doubt abolishing net zero which is classic right wing politics at present
I know, and none of those things will make any significant impact on global energy supplies - unlike further investment in renewables which bizarrely he is against.
Horseshit. I am massively supportive of a huge investment in tidal, because tidal is a classic investment - an initial outlay with the pay off of relatively cheap, dependable power on a more or less indefinite basis. I am against further 'investment' (if chucking subsidy money at overseas wealth funds can be considered an investment) in wind and solar, because they will never provide cheap or dependable power, which RCS, with his industry experience has acknowledged, and you would know if you bothered to educate yourself beyond agreeing with Keir Starmer's platitudes.
As for 'politically impossible', Germany is subject to exactly the same external political pressures as we are (possibly more due to the EU), yet they are razing towns to dig coal mines because they refuse to offshore their economy and impoverish their people - that's the bottom line. Sadly our useless excuse for a Government doesn't have a bottom line.
As for Net Zero, I am not for abandoning it (though any elected Government should reserve the right to do so), I am for finding creative ways to meet the target (such as dressing fields with rock dust) that don't involve taking our economy back to the dark ages. And if necessary, being prepared to miss the target if it proves incompatible with economical survival. You will find this approach is very unpopular with proponents of Net Zero, who are worried that other ways of meeting the target may be found and people may be allowed to continue their 'high carbon lifestyles' - because control over peoples' lifestyles was the whole point.
Tidal energy is sensible, but decades away
Solar is productive and certainly our panels are excellent, and as far as wind is concerned investment is supported across the parties save maybe Tice and RefUK
You are not remotely realistic if you think the UK will follow Germany in coal, but then you support Truss so being unrealistic comes with the territory
You are going to have to come to terms with Starmer, PM, as it is happening and frankly to this conservative it will be a relief when he takes over what will be the ultimate hospital pass
Tidal doesn't need to be decades away, it is old tech - dams. It makes total sense, and is a measure of how bad our deeply dysfunctional political and administrative class has got that it hasn't broken ground already. And I hold Truss just as responsible as she had no plans to revive the project either.
Wind can never be economical. We can, at best, soften its negative impact on energy costs by altering the subsidy system to ensure all excess power is stored.
If you don't think a Government that is prepared to risk being tutted at globally to serve the national interest is 'realistic' you have a very low opinion of UK politics. Perhaps you are right, but I am an optimist.
Not a low opinion of UK politics, just a realistic one
"A striking still-life fresco resembling a pizza has been found among the ruins of ancient Pompeii... and includes one item that looks suspiciously like a pineapple."
Did you bother to even read that article before you posted it?
"Fish fingers are still a good way to get the wary to eat fish. After Birds Eye developed fish fingers, it created the tagline “no bones, no waste, no smell, no fuss” and that still holds. So what else is in there? Nothing too odd, it seems."
Which part of 65% fish did you fail to understand?
from the article
"There’s not a lot of fish in fingers compared to a full-size fillet, but they are an easy way to have fish. The only question for Captain Birds Eye now is whether to fry or grill them."
Duh. Because a fair proportion of it is batter! I'm not here to defend fish fingers, which are mundane food at best, but your staunch opposition to them seems... a little weird.
You think 42% of a fish finger is breadcrumb? That just shows you are talking bollocked. Get a pack of fishfingers scrape the crumb off and weigh both....I do not believe for a moment the bread crumb scrapings will get anywhere near 42%.
"A striking still-life fresco resembling a pizza has been found among the ruins of ancient Pompeii... and includes one item that looks suspiciously like a pineapple."
Did you bother to even read that article before you posted it?
"Fish fingers are still a good way to get the wary to eat fish. After Birds Eye developed fish fingers, it created the tagline “no bones, no waste, no smell, no fuss” and that still holds. So what else is in there? Nothing too odd, it seems."
Which part of 65% fish did you fail to understand?
from the article
"There’s not a lot of fish in fingers compared to a full-size fillet, but they are an easy way to have fish. The only question for Captain Birds Eye now is whether to fry or grill them."
Duh. Because a fair proportion of it is batter! I'm not here to defend fish fingers, which are mundane food at best, but your staunch opposition to them seems... a little weird.
Fish finger sandwich with mayo in place of butter is an absolute classic. Loved it since my student days. A bit carbon heavy, but hits the spot.
Fillet fish fingers with pepper, butter, tartare sauce and iceberg lettuce on ciabatta... far from 100% fish (!) but a pretty decent snack.
"A striking still-life fresco resembling a pizza has been found among the ruins of ancient Pompeii... and includes one item that looks suspiciously like a pineapple."
Did you bother to even read that article before you posted it?
"Fish fingers are still a good way to get the wary to eat fish. After Birds Eye developed fish fingers, it created the tagline “no bones, no waste, no smell, no fuss” and that still holds. So what else is in there? Nothing too odd, it seems."
Which part of 65% fish did you fail to understand?
from the article
"There’s not a lot of fish in fingers compared to a full-size fillet, but they are an easy way to have fish. The only question for Captain Birds Eye now is whether to fry or grill them."
Duh. Because a fair proportion of it is batter! I'm not here to defend fish fingers, which are mundane food at best, but your staunch opposition to them seems... a little weird.
"A striking still-life fresco resembling a pizza has been found among the ruins of ancient Pompeii... and includes one item that looks suspiciously like a pineapple."
Did you bother to even read that article before you posted it?
"Fish fingers are still a good way to get the wary to eat fish. After Birds Eye developed fish fingers, it created the tagline “no bones, no waste, no smell, no fuss” and that still holds. So what else is in there? Nothing too odd, it seems."
Which part of 65% fish did you fail to understand?
from the article
"There’s not a lot of fish in fingers compared to a full-size fillet, but they are an easy way to have fish. The only question for Captain Birds Eye now is whether to fry or grill them."
Where does it say less than 65% fish?
Edit: I'd like to apologise Pagan. It may not say anything about 65% in the article but I've just checked the Waitrose website for Bird's Eye Cod fish fingers...
Birds eye it says "Birds Eye’s box of 18 fish fingers uses just 58 per cent fish but keep reading the ingredients "
and here "Dunnes’ Alaskan Pollock fish fingers have 65 per cent fish fillet"
Yes, they have a coating, that's not exactly a secret.
The coating is thin and forms much less than 20% of a fishfinger. Sorry processed food is basically crap and even 58% cod is probably a large portion of stuff you wouldnt expect in a fillet of cod just like most beefburgers will contain lips, testicles etc.
Which of the ingredients is it you are objecting to?
I am saying the definition of fish is not one most would willingly eat....just like the definition of beef is wide in beefburgers which certainly arent minced steak for example but contain a lot of minced parts that you couldn't persuade people to buy
So when they say it is 100% fillet you are convinced they are lying? Rather than being concerned about the fish %?
I trust food companies not to lie rather less than I trust Liz truss to be competent frankly, you want to trust them go right ahead
Birds Eye chilli con carne had horsemeat in it instead of beef a decade or so ago, so sure these things happen and it would be foolish to trust them 100%. But equally it is kind of weird to be so convinced that they are particularly lying about fish finger ingredients rather than elsewhere in their range, probably occassionally and sporadically as things go wrong.
"A striking still-life fresco resembling a pizza has been found among the ruins of ancient Pompeii... and includes one item that looks suspiciously like a pineapple."
Did you bother to even read that article before you posted it?
"Fish fingers are still a good way to get the wary to eat fish. After Birds Eye developed fish fingers, it created the tagline “no bones, no waste, no smell, no fuss” and that still holds. So what else is in there? Nothing too odd, it seems."
Which part of 65% fish did you fail to understand?
from the article
"There’s not a lot of fish in fingers compared to a full-size fillet, but they are an easy way to have fish. The only question for Captain Birds Eye now is whether to fry or grill them."
Duh. Because a fair proportion of it is batter! I'm not here to defend fish fingers, which are mundane food at best, but your staunch opposition to them seems... a little weird.
You think 42% of a fish finger is breadcrumb? That just shows you are talking bollocked. Get a pack of fishfingers scrape the crumb off and weigh both....I do not believe for a moment the bread crumb scrapings will get anywhere near 42%.
The notion that pay policy should be used to curb inflation was rightly castigated 50 years ago by Enoch Powell when he asked Heath if he’d taken leave of his senses, by introducing pay controls.
But it sounds more dignified than "if we increase public sector pay there won't be money left for tax cuts."
@rcs1000 I've been meaning to ask you a follow up question to one I asked you a while back. It was about whether we had the generation capacity to charge up 3m cars every night
What about freight, and plant and farm machinery? Surely we're going to have to seriously increase our generation to satisfy that demand?
The most immediate movement we seem to have coming on generation capacity is downward: we have to 'Just Stop' burning fossil fuels
I know that we have loads more windfarms coming on stream over the next few years (if we can get the parts to finish them), but wind isn't reliable enough to be our main source of energy without a huge increase in storage capacity
I've read a lot of comments saying that having car batteries solves the problem of storage. I reckon at most it would mitigate it a little; How would people travel when the wind hadn't blown? And how much could you usefully store in cars beyond travel needs?
We need to build huge amounts of energy storage and we need to start now
Some wind providers are already storing their power to sell on to the grid later, because that way they get paid by the grid to constrain, and paid again to sell the power. Though this is an outrageous pisstake, it's actually one of the less malign subsidy loopholes, because it results in evening out of supply. Imo, this subsidy should be retained, and all othrrs eliminated. We'd then see a lot more power storage without 'we' (by which I assume you mean the put upon taxpayer) being on the hook for it.
PB lefties and loons and persons-of-the-tiny-pecker-commminity (Aka @JosiasJessop and @kinabalu) must have an entire portfolio of questions I can lob at him over the lobster claws
What did Evelyn Rothschild really say to the then Prince of Wales, now King, when he poked him in the chest with his finger?
"A striking still-life fresco resembling a pizza has been found among the ruins of ancient Pompeii... and includes one item that looks suspiciously like a pineapple."
Did you bother to even read that article before you posted it?
"Fish fingers are still a good way to get the wary to eat fish. After Birds Eye developed fish fingers, it created the tagline “no bones, no waste, no smell, no fuss” and that still holds. So what else is in there? Nothing too odd, it seems."
Which part of 65% fish did you fail to understand?
from the article
"There’s not a lot of fish in fingers compared to a full-size fillet, but they are an easy way to have fish. The only question for Captain Birds Eye now is whether to fry or grill them."
Where does it say less than 65% fish?
Edit: I'd like to apologise Pagan. It may not say anything about 65% in the article but I've just checked the Waitrose website for Bird's Eye Cod fish fingers...
"the absence of evidence for a lab leak, and in the presence of evidence for the market as the source" is mere fantasy. To believe it you have to believe that circumstantial evidence is conclusive in favour of the market and inadmissible in favour of the lab, and to ignore the huge debate about whether the furin cleavage site is likely to have arisen in nature.
The evidence for the market is not circumstantial. The early cases were clustered around the market. Environmental analyses found the virus in the market. That there were two initial strains of SARS-COV-2 is consistent with a reservoir of infected animals in the market.
It is, if course, entirely possible for the wet market to be both the focal point, and it to have been a lab leak.
That., of course, it almost certainly what happened. Leaked in the lab - the CDC more likely than the WIV - simply because of proximity - 300 metres away. Infected but pre-symptomatic lab worker went from the CDC to the market to buy a chicken. Bingo. Superspreader event, clustered around the market
It's not obvious to me.
Wild -> lab -> market is plausible and you assert that the wild -> lab bit was happening (and I have no reason to disbelieve this) but the lab -> market bit still requires some lapses that are fairly rare and the timing has to be just right (they do happen, it is certainly possible)
Wild -> market is also plausible and while you assert that wild -> animal in market is unlikely (and again I have no reason to disbelieve) there's also potential for a chain of transmission through animals (or containers, surfaces, air) to market or even indeed a person infected elsewhere (not from lab, closer to large populations of bats) taking it to the market.
I don't see a strong reason to favour one of those over the other, on the available evidence.
If the outbreak had happened in any other city in China, then a purely zoonotic origin would be the most likely scenario. That it happened in the same city where bat diseases were being actively studied skews the probabilities the other way around.
Most large Chinese cities have labs studying coronaviruses. If you're worried about zoonotic infections in China, you're looking at bat diseases. So, if the outbreak had happened in any other city in China, there's a high chance there would have been a similar lab.
This doesn't seem to be true. The number of BSL-4 labs in China is very small.
And a lab leak can come from a BSL-3 lab. After all, WCDC is not BSL-4 lab, and that's the one Leon is most animated about. If it was artificially manipulated, then the odds change. If it was a natural sample leaked (which is where the focus now lies), then it's any BSL-3 lab or higher.
(Edited - BSL-3)
The CDC was, I believe, operating at BSL 2
That's why Jeremy Farrar's first reaction, on hearing about Covid, was that the lab work in China was "like the Wild West". He also believed it probably came from the lab
Yet weirdly enough about six minutes after writing that email he signed a letter to the Lancet calling "lab leak" a baseless conspiracy theory
Funny, huh
Proof that some of this terrifying bat research was done at BSL2 level (I reckon this is the Wuhan CDC they are talking about)
"In EHA-led work conducted in Wuhan, scientists infected humanized mice with engineered novel bat coronaviruses in a BSL-3 facility, according to grant documents EHA submitted to the NIH. Some collection and engineering of bat coronaviruses were done in a BSL-2, with less stringent protocols and containment, according to multiple sources including a paper in the Journal of Virology ."
I always find it's good to look at the home page of any linked website I'm not familiar with. This one looks... interesting.
It has header sections including "Bill Gates", "Pesticides" and "ultra-processed foods"
Which *really* set my spider-senses tingling.
Fuck, yeah, why are they worried abour "Pesticides" and "Ultra-processed foods"???
What a bunch of cranks
You are a dangerous fool. Your sort of sh*t is exactly how people get dragged into cults and misinformation black holes.
And how does "Bill Gates" fit into your thinking?
No idea. Anyway I've just given you THE TIMES and Jeremy Farrar as an alternative source for the exact same information. So you can put away your angry little pecker of outrage
Exactly. You don't think. You are almost uniquely incapable of thought. Thought, to you, is just which sad girl will accept the least money for you to wait hours for the blue pills to take effect. Your brain is the nearest humanity has found to a vacuum. Scientists are examining your skull to see how something so thin can withstand a 1atm pressure difference.
Why am I reacting this way? You're going through the lableak hypothesis because it's dramatic. Because lots of people died, and you think blaming the Chinese is cool.
RFK Jr is involved with that website, and if you cared one jot for people, then he would be one person you would run a mile from. You would spit in his face. You would throw rotten tomatoes at him in the stocks. RFK Jr was one of the key people spreading MMR disinformation, hence harming efforts to stop the spread of those diseases, and harming vaccination as a whole.
*If* you had a conscience, you would eat pizzas with pineapple for the next week to make amends.
But you don't have a conscience.
The merits of most sorts of theory are pretty much independent of the morals of the people adhering to it. Hitler was probably a convinced heliocentric.
Industrial accidents with dire consequences are commonplace and not really that exciting, I would not have thought. Bhopal - the Movie may exist, but it'll be a downbeat documentary.
And most importantly, lab leak is the least Chinese-blamey game in town by a country mile. US Big Science was balls deep in the gain of function nonsense, whereas wet markets is 100% the inscrutable oriental.
Three points for Godwinning yourself. One point for missing the point. A zillion points for getting blame-the-US in the conversation.
Do you have kids? Did they get the MMR jab?
*Of course* lab leak is Chinese-blamey game - especially as it often leads onto the designed-virus stuff.
You don't understand what "Godwin" means. It is widely understood and easily googled. Have a go.
What it doesn't mean, is using someone universally recognised as very evil, as an example of someone very evil. I can't see the problem with that, so please elucidate?
You don't seem to understand anything about any of this. Gain of function research is a recognised, mainstream, practice. You seem to think it is a sort of 4chan fantasy, or so I deduce from "designed-virus stuff."
And I wasn't "blaming the US." as a matter of fact I am not blaming anyone. I was saying IF someone else adheres to the lab leak theory THEN that other person holds the less anti-Chinese of the two possible views. It is hard to see how to conduct a rational conversation with someone who gets from there, to where you are.
And, politely, my childrens' medical records are off limits.
"You don't seem to understand anything about any of this." Well, I'd argue that's an indication of your lack of perception.
"And, politely, my childrens' medical records are off limits"
And that's fair enough. But if you didn't give your kids the MMR vaccine for non-medical reasons, then you are a shit. An absolute shit who does not care for his kids. But as you do care for your kids, I'd assume that you gave them the MMR jab,
And as that's the case, why trust JFK on anything?
I don't "trust JFK" on this because he is dead, and if you mean "RFK jr" I hadn't heard of him before today. From what I have seen, he was quoted purely as relaying academically reliable sources. I won't trigger you again by referring to hitler, but if Pol Pot wrote a paper referring to Darwin on the OOS, how badly damaging would that be to the theory of ebns?
as to the link: congrats! you have googled, read and completely misunderstood probably the simplest article anywhere in wp. Well done.
You're on a political website - this website - and you haven't heard of JFK Jr? The guy who threw his hat into the ring for President a while back?
John-John copped off with The Virgin instead of Elaine and then died in a plane crash. He never ran for President.
"the absence of evidence for a lab leak, and in the presence of evidence for the market as the source" is mere fantasy. To believe it you have to believe that circumstantial evidence is conclusive in favour of the market and inadmissible in favour of the lab, and to ignore the huge debate about whether the furin cleavage site is likely to have arisen in nature.
The evidence for the market is not circumstantial. The early cases were clustered around the market. Environmental analyses found the virus in the market. That there were two initial strains of SARS-COV-2 is consistent with a reservoir of infected animals in the market.
It is, if course, entirely possible for the wet market to be both the focal point, and it to have been a lab leak.
That., of course, it almost certainly what happened. Leaked in the lab - the CDC more likely than the WIV - simply because of proximity - 300 metres away. Infected but pre-symptomatic lab worker went from the CDC to the market to buy a chicken. Bingo. Superspreader event, clustered around the market
It's not obvious to me.
Wild -> lab -> market is plausible and you assert that the wild -> lab bit was happening (and I have no reason to disbelieve this) but the lab -> market bit still requires some lapses that are fairly rare and the timing has to be just right (they do happen, it is certainly possible)
Wild -> market is also plausible and while you assert that wild -> animal in market is unlikely (and again I have no reason to disbelieve) there's also potential for a chain of transmission through animals (or containers, surfaces, air) to market or even indeed a person infected elsewhere (not from lab, closer to large populations of bats) taking it to the market.
I don't see a strong reason to favour one of those over the other, on the available evidence.
If the outbreak had happened in any other city in China, then a purely zoonotic origin would be the most likely scenario. That it happened in the same city where bat diseases were being actively studied skews the probabilities the other way around.
Most large Chinese cities have labs studying coronaviruses. If you're worried about zoonotic infections in China, you're looking at bat diseases. So, if the outbreak had happened in any other city in China, there's a high chance there would have been a similar lab.
This doesn't seem to be true. The number of BSL-4 labs in China is very small.
And a lab leak can come from a BSL-3 lab. After all, WCDC is not BSL-4 lab, and that's the one Leon is most animated about. If it was artificially manipulated, then the odds change. If it was a natural sample leaked (which is where the focus now lies), then it's any BSL-3 lab or higher.
(Edited - BSL-3)
The CDC was, I believe, operating at BSL 2
That's why Jeremy Farrar's first reaction, on hearing about Covid, was that the lab work in China was "like the Wild West". He also believed it probably came from the lab
Yet weirdly enough about six minutes after writing that email he signed a letter to the Lancet calling "lab leak" a baseless conspiracy theory
Funny, huh
Proof that some of this terrifying bat research was done at BSL2 level (I reckon this is the Wuhan CDC they are talking about)
"In EHA-led work conducted in Wuhan, scientists infected humanized mice with engineered novel bat coronaviruses in a BSL-3 facility, according to grant documents EHA submitted to the NIH. Some collection and engineering of bat coronaviruses were done in a BSL-2, with less stringent protocols and containment, according to multiple sources including a paper in the Journal of Virology ."
I always find it's good to look at the home page of any linked website I'm not familiar with. This one looks... interesting.
It has header sections including "Bill Gates", "Pesticides" and "ultra-processed foods"
Which *really* set my spider-senses tingling.
Fuck, yeah, why are they worried abour "Pesticides" and "Ultra-processed foods"???
What a bunch of cranks
You are a dangerous fool. Your sort of sh*t is exactly how people get dragged into cults and misinformation black holes.
And how does "Bill Gates" fit into your thinking?
No idea. Anyway I've just given you THE TIMES and Jeremy Farrar as an alternative source for the exact same information. So you can put away your angry little pecker of outrage
Exactly. You don't think. You are almost uniquely incapable of thought. Thought, to you, is just which sad girl will accept the least money for you to wait hours for the blue pills to take effect. Your brain is the nearest humanity has found to a vacuum. Scientists are examining your skull to see how something so thin can withstand a 1atm pressure difference.
Why am I reacting this way? You're going through the lableak hypothesis because it's dramatic. Because lots of people died, and you think blaming the Chinese is cool.
RFK Jr is involved with that website, and if you cared one jot for people, then he would be one person you would run a mile from. You would spit in his face. You would throw rotten tomatoes at him in the stocks. RFK Jr was one of the key people spreading MMR disinformation, hence harming efforts to stop the spread of those diseases, and harming vaccination as a whole.
*If* you had a conscience, you would eat pizzas with pineapple for the next week to make amends.
But you don't have a conscience.
The merits of most sorts of theory are pretty much independent of the morals of the people adhering to it. Hitler was probably a convinced heliocentric.
Industrial accidents with dire consequences are commonplace and not really that exciting, I would not have thought. Bhopal - the Movie may exist, but it'll be a downbeat documentary.
And most importantly, lab leak is the least Chinese-blamey game in town by a country mile. US Big Science was balls deep in the gain of function nonsense, whereas wet markets is 100% the inscrutable oriental.
Three points for Godwinning yourself. One point for missing the point. A zillion points for getting blame-the-US in the conversation.
Do you have kids? Did they get the MMR jab?
*Of course* lab leak is Chinese-blamey game - especially as it often leads onto the designed-virus stuff.
You don't understand what "Godwin" means. It is widely understood and easily googled. Have a go.
What it doesn't mean, is using someone universally recognised as very evil, as an example of someone very evil. I can't see the problem with that, so please elucidate?
You don't seem to understand anything about any of this. Gain of function research is a recognised, mainstream, practice. You seem to think it is a sort of 4chan fantasy, or so I deduce from "designed-virus stuff."
And I wasn't "blaming the US." as a matter of fact I am not blaming anyone. I was saying IF someone else adheres to the lab leak theory THEN that other person holds the less anti-Chinese of the two possible views. It is hard to see how to conduct a rational conversation with someone who gets from there, to where you are.
And, politely, my childrens' medical records are off limits.
"You don't seem to understand anything about any of this." Well, I'd argue that's an indication of your lack of perception.
"And, politely, my childrens' medical records are off limits"
And that's fair enough. But if you didn't give your kids the MMR vaccine for non-medical reasons, then you are a shit. An absolute shit who does not care for his kids. But as you do care for your kids, I'd assume that you gave them the MMR jab,
And as that's the case, why trust JFK on anything?
I don't "trust JFK" on this because he is dead, and if you mean "RFK jr" I hadn't heard of him before today. From what I have seen, he was quoted purely as relaying academically reliable sources. I won't trigger you again by referring to hitler, but if Pol Pot wrote a paper referring to Darwin on the OOS, how badly damaging would that be to the theory of ebns?
as to the link: congrats! you have googled, read and completely misunderstood probably the simplest article anywhere in wp. Well done.
You're on a political website - this website - and you haven't heard of JFK Jr? The guy who threw his hat into the ring for President a while back?
"From what I have seen, he was quoted purely as relaying academically reliable sources."
Please give examples.
That guy who disregarded weather advice and over-rated his piloting skills only to crash his aircraft in a spatial disorientation incident?
"A striking still-life fresco resembling a pizza has been found among the ruins of ancient Pompeii... and includes one item that looks suspiciously like a pineapple."
Did you bother to even read that article before you posted it?
"Fish fingers are still a good way to get the wary to eat fish. After Birds Eye developed fish fingers, it created the tagline “no bones, no waste, no smell, no fuss” and that still holds. So what else is in there? Nothing too odd, it seems."
Which part of 65% fish did you fail to understand?
from the article
"There’s not a lot of fish in fingers compared to a full-size fillet, but they are an easy way to have fish. The only question for Captain Birds Eye now is whether to fry or grill them."
Duh. Because a fair proportion of it is batter! I'm not here to defend fish fingers, which are mundane food at best, but your staunch opposition to them seems... a little weird.
You think 42% of a fish finger is breadcrumb? That just shows you are talking bollocked. Get a pack of fishfingers scrape the crumb off and weigh both....I do not believe for a moment the bread crumb scrapings will get anywhere near 42%.
Generally no, more like 80/20. But if you've never tried, go and buy the value brand:
"A striking still-life fresco resembling a pizza has been found among the ruins of ancient Pompeii... and includes one item that looks suspiciously like a pineapple."
Did you bother to even read that article before you posted it?
"Fish fingers are still a good way to get the wary to eat fish. After Birds Eye developed fish fingers, it created the tagline “no bones, no waste, no smell, no fuss” and that still holds. So what else is in there? Nothing too odd, it seems."
Which part of 65% fish did you fail to understand?
from the article
"There’s not a lot of fish in fingers compared to a full-size fillet, but they are an easy way to have fish. The only question for Captain Birds Eye now is whether to fry or grill them."
Duh. Because a fair proportion of it is batter! I'm not here to defend fish fingers, which are mundane food at best, but your staunch opposition to them seems... a little weird.
You think 42% of a fish finger is breadcrumb? That just shows you are talking bollocked. Get a pack of fishfingers scrape the crumb off and weigh both....I do not believe for a moment the bread crumb scrapings will get anywhere near 42%.
"A striking still-life fresco resembling a pizza has been found among the ruins of ancient Pompeii... and includes one item that looks suspiciously like a pineapple."
Did you bother to even read that article before you posted it?
"Fish fingers are still a good way to get the wary to eat fish. After Birds Eye developed fish fingers, it created the tagline “no bones, no waste, no smell, no fuss” and that still holds. So what else is in there? Nothing too odd, it seems."
Which part of 65% fish did you fail to understand?
from the article
"There’s not a lot of fish in fingers compared to a full-size fillet, but they are an easy way to have fish. The only question for Captain Birds Eye now is whether to fry or grill them."
Duh. Because a fair proportion of it is batter! I'm not here to defend fish fingers, which are mundane food at best, but your staunch opposition to them seems... a little weird.
"A striking still-life fresco resembling a pizza has been found among the ruins of ancient Pompeii... and includes one item that looks suspiciously like a pineapple."
Did you bother to even read that article before you posted it?
"Fish fingers are still a good way to get the wary to eat fish. After Birds Eye developed fish fingers, it created the tagline “no bones, no waste, no smell, no fuss” and that still holds. So what else is in there? Nothing too odd, it seems."
Which part of 65% fish did you fail to understand?
from the article
"There’s not a lot of fish in fingers compared to a full-size fillet, but they are an easy way to have fish. The only question for Captain Birds Eye now is whether to fry or grill them."
Where does it say less than 65% fish?
Edit: I'd like to apologise Pagan. It may not say anything about 65% in the article but I've just checked the Waitrose website for Bird's Eye Cod fish fingers...
Birds eye it says "Birds Eye’s box of 18 fish fingers uses just 58 per cent fish but keep reading the ingredients "
and here "Dunnes’ Alaskan Pollock fish fingers have 65 per cent fish fillet"
Yes, they have a coating, that's not exactly a secret.
The coating is thin and forms much less than 20% of a fishfinger. Sorry processed food is basically crap and even 58% cod is probably a large portion of stuff you wouldnt expect in a fillet of cod just like most beefburgers will contain lips, testicles etc.
Which of the ingredients is it you are objecting to?
I am saying the definition of fish is not one most would willingly eat....just like the definition of beef is wide in beefburgers which certainly arent minced steak for example but contain a lot of minced parts that you couldn't persuade people to buy
So when they say it is 100% fillet you are convinced they are lying? Rather than being concerned about the fish %?
I trust food companies not to lie rather less than I trust Liz truss to be competent frankly, you want to trust them go right ahead
Birds Eye chilli con carne had horsemeat in it instead of beef a decade or so ago, so sure these things happen and it would be foolish to trust them 100%. But equally it is kind of weird to be so convinced that they are particularly lying about fish finger ingredients rather than elsewhere in their range, probably occassionally and sporadically as things go wrong.
I dont buy processed food full stop
Being against processed food in general makes a lot more sense than being particularly against fish fingers.
"A striking still-life fresco resembling a pizza has been found among the ruins of ancient Pompeii... and includes one item that looks suspiciously like a pineapple."
Did you bother to even read that article before you posted it?
"Fish fingers are still a good way to get the wary to eat fish. After Birds Eye developed fish fingers, it created the tagline “no bones, no waste, no smell, no fuss” and that still holds. So what else is in there? Nothing too odd, it seems."
Which part of 65% fish did you fail to understand?
from the article
"There’s not a lot of fish in fingers compared to a full-size fillet, but they are an easy way to have fish. The only question for Captain Birds Eye now is whether to fry or grill them."
Where does it say less than 65% fish?
Edit: I'd like to apologise Pagan. It may not say anything about 65% in the article but I've just checked the Waitrose website for Bird's Eye Cod fish fingers...
Birds eye it says "Birds Eye’s box of 18 fish fingers uses just 58 per cent fish but keep reading the ingredients "
and here "Dunnes’ Alaskan Pollock fish fingers have 65 per cent fish fillet"
Yes, they have a coating, that's not exactly a secret.
Exactly. In other shock news, sausage rolls aren't 100% sausage and Beef Wellington isn't 100% beef.
Pagan will soon discover that cheese sandwiches aren't 100% cheese
Just don't tell him that chicken pies aren't 100% chicken.
30% of chickens are chicken guts...
Ever had chicken claws at an Asian restaurant? (Top tip: do not chew them!)
Steamed chicken feet in curry sauce are a frequent element of a dim sum menu, as I found when experimenting with one of the more Chinese-heavy menus once.
"A striking still-life fresco resembling a pizza has been found among the ruins of ancient Pompeii... and includes one item that looks suspiciously like a pineapple."
Did you bother to even read that article before you posted it?
"Fish fingers are still a good way to get the wary to eat fish. After Birds Eye developed fish fingers, it created the tagline “no bones, no waste, no smell, no fuss” and that still holds. So what else is in there? Nothing too odd, it seems."
Which part of 65% fish did you fail to understand?
from the article
"There’s not a lot of fish in fingers compared to a full-size fillet, but they are an easy way to have fish. The only question for Captain Birds Eye now is whether to fry or grill them."
Duh. Because a fair proportion of it is batter! I'm not here to defend fish fingers, which are mundane food at best, but your staunch opposition to them seems... a little weird.
"A striking still-life fresco resembling a pizza has been found among the ruins of ancient Pompeii... and includes one item that looks suspiciously like a pineapple."
Did you bother to even read that article before you posted it?
"Fish fingers are still a good way to get the wary to eat fish. After Birds Eye developed fish fingers, it created the tagline “no bones, no waste, no smell, no fuss” and that still holds. So what else is in there? Nothing too odd, it seems."
Which part of 65% fish did you fail to understand?
from the article
"There’s not a lot of fish in fingers compared to a full-size fillet, but they are an easy way to have fish. The only question for Captain Birds Eye now is whether to fry or grill them."
Where does it say less than 65% fish?
Edit: I'd like to apologise Pagan. It may not say anything about 65% in the article but I've just checked the Waitrose website for Bird's Eye Cod fish fingers...
Birds eye it says "Birds Eye’s box of 18 fish fingers uses just 58 per cent fish but keep reading the ingredients "
and here "Dunnes’ Alaskan Pollock fish fingers have 65 per cent fish fillet"
Yes, they have a coating, that's not exactly a secret.
The coating is thin and forms much less than 20% of a fishfinger. Sorry processed food is basically crap and even 58% cod is probably a large portion of stuff you wouldnt expect in a fillet of cod just like most beefburgers will contain lips, testicles etc.
Which of the ingredients is it you are objecting to?
I am saying the definition of fish is not one most would willingly eat....just like the definition of beef is wide in beefburgers which certainly arent minced steak for example but contain a lot of minced parts that you couldn't persuade people to buy
So when they say it is 100% fillet you are convinced they are lying? Rather than being concerned about the fish %?
I trust food companies not to lie rather less than I trust Liz truss to be competent frankly, you want to trust them go right ahead
Birds Eye chilli con carne had horsemeat in it instead of beef a decade or so ago, so sure these things happen and it would be foolish to trust them 100%. But equally it is kind of weird to be so convinced that they are particularly lying about fish finger ingredients rather than elsewhere in their range, probably occassionally and sporadically as things go wrong.
I dont buy processed food full stop
Being against processed food in general makes a lot more sense than being particularly against fish fingers.
Its not fish fingers in general it just happened to be someone talking about fishfingers that triggered the conversation so we focussed on fish fingers
The fish finger cathexis in this discussion is really something. It must be part of the come down from Saturday's hysteria.
Ah, you mean people reacting to the news, yes, total hysteria, that was the troll's line too. People should only ever react with all knowing serenity to every action, otherwise they are just being hysterical.
"A striking still-life fresco resembling a pizza has been found among the ruins of ancient Pompeii... and includes one item that looks suspiciously like a pineapple."
Did you bother to even read that article before you posted it?
"Fish fingers are still a good way to get the wary to eat fish. After Birds Eye developed fish fingers, it created the tagline “no bones, no waste, no smell, no fuss” and that still holds. So what else is in there? Nothing too odd, it seems."
Which part of 65% fish did you fail to understand?
from the article
"There’s not a lot of fish in fingers compared to a full-size fillet, but they are an easy way to have fish. The only question for Captain Birds Eye now is whether to fry or grill them."
Duh. Because a fair proportion of it is batter! I'm not here to defend fish fingers, which are mundane food at best, but your staunch opposition to them seems... a little weird.
Fish finger sandwich with mayo in place of butter is an absolute classic. Loved it since my student days. A bit carbon heavy, but hits the spot.
Fillet fish fingers with pepper, butter, tartare sauce and iceberg lettuce on ciabatta... far from 100% fish (!) but a pretty decent snack.
And what are goujons? Just posh fish fingers, or perhaps little toes.
The fish finger cathexis in this discussion is really something. It must be part of the come down from Saturday's hysteria.
Regression to childhood for me. Fish fingers and beans at Grandma's every Saturday whilst the rest of the adults went down the boozer. This was in an era where children were not welcome at the pub.
"the absence of evidence for a lab leak, and in the presence of evidence for the market as the source" is mere fantasy. To believe it you have to believe that circumstantial evidence is conclusive in favour of the market and inadmissible in favour of the lab, and to ignore the huge debate about whether the furin cleavage site is likely to have arisen in nature.
The evidence for the market is not circumstantial. The early cases were clustered around the market. Environmental analyses found the virus in the market. That there were two initial strains of SARS-COV-2 is consistent with a reservoir of infected animals in the market.
It is, if course, entirely possible for the wet market to be both the focal point, and it to have been a lab leak.
That., of course, it almost certainly what happened. Leaked in the lab - the CDC more likely than the WIV - simply because of proximity - 300 metres away. Infected but pre-symptomatic lab worker went from the CDC to the market to buy a chicken. Bingo. Superspreader event, clustered around the market
It's not obvious to me.
Wild -> lab -> market is plausible and you assert that the wild -> lab bit was happening (and I have no reason to disbelieve this) but the lab -> market bit still requires some lapses that are fairly rare and the timing has to be just right (they do happen, it is certainly possible)
Wild -> market is also plausible and while you assert that wild -> animal in market is unlikely (and again I have no reason to disbelieve) there's also potential for a chain of transmission through animals (or containers, surfaces, air) to market or even indeed a person infected elsewhere (not from lab, closer to large populations of bats) taking it to the market.
I don't see a strong reason to favour one of those over the other, on the available evidence.
If the outbreak had happened in any other city in China, then a purely zoonotic origin would be the most likely scenario. That it happened in the same city where bat diseases were being actively studied skews the probabilities the other way around.
Most large Chinese cities have labs studying coronaviruses. If you're worried about zoonotic infections in China, you're looking at bat diseases. So, if the outbreak had happened in any other city in China, there's a high chance there would have been a similar lab.
This doesn't seem to be true. The number of BSL-4 labs in China is very small.
And a lab leak can come from a BSL-3 lab. After all, WCDC is not BSL-4 lab, and that's the one Leon is most animated about. If it was artificially manipulated, then the odds change. If it was a natural sample leaked (which is where the focus now lies), then it's any BSL-3 lab or higher.
(Edited - BSL-3)
The CDC was, I believe, operating at BSL 2
That's why Jeremy Farrar's first reaction, on hearing about Covid, was that the lab work in China was "like the Wild West". He also believed it probably came from the lab
Yet weirdly enough about six minutes after writing that email he signed a letter to the Lancet calling "lab leak" a baseless conspiracy theory
Funny, huh
Proof that some of this terrifying bat research was done at BSL2 level (I reckon this is the Wuhan CDC they are talking about)
"In EHA-led work conducted in Wuhan, scientists infected humanized mice with engineered novel bat coronaviruses in a BSL-3 facility, according to grant documents EHA submitted to the NIH. Some collection and engineering of bat coronaviruses were done in a BSL-2, with less stringent protocols and containment, according to multiple sources including a paper in the Journal of Virology ."
I always find it's good to look at the home page of any linked website I'm not familiar with. This one looks... interesting.
It has header sections including "Bill Gates", "Pesticides" and "ultra-processed foods"
Which *really* set my spider-senses tingling.
Fuck, yeah, why are they worried abour "Pesticides" and "Ultra-processed foods"???
What a bunch of cranks
You are a dangerous fool. Your sort of sh*t is exactly how people get dragged into cults and misinformation black holes.
And how does "Bill Gates" fit into your thinking?
No idea. Anyway I've just given you THE TIMES and Jeremy Farrar as an alternative source for the exact same information. So you can put away your angry little pecker of outrage
Exactly. You don't think. You are almost uniquely incapable of thought. Thought, to you, is just which sad girl will accept the least money for you to wait hours for the blue pills to take effect. Your brain is the nearest humanity has found to a vacuum. Scientists are examining your skull to see how something so thin can withstand a 1atm pressure difference.
Why am I reacting this way? You're going through the lableak hypothesis because it's dramatic. Because lots of people died, and you think blaming the Chinese is cool.
RFK Jr is involved with that website, and if you cared one jot for people, then he would be one person you would run a mile from. You would spit in his face. You would throw rotten tomatoes at him in the stocks. RFK Jr was one of the key people spreading MMR disinformation, hence harming efforts to stop the spread of those diseases, and harming vaccination as a whole.
*If* you had a conscience, you would eat pizzas with pineapple for the next week to make amends.
But you don't have a conscience.
The merits of most sorts of theory are pretty much independent of the morals of the people adhering to it. Hitler was probably a convinced heliocentric.
Industrial accidents with dire consequences are commonplace and not really that exciting, I would not have thought. Bhopal - the Movie may exist, but it'll be a downbeat documentary.
And most importantly, lab leak is the least Chinese-blamey game in town by a country mile. US Big Science was balls deep in the gain of function nonsense, whereas wet markets is 100% the inscrutable oriental.
Three points for Godwinning yourself. One point for missing the point. A zillion points for getting blame-the-US in the conversation.
Do you have kids? Did they get the MMR jab?
*Of course* lab leak is Chinese-blamey game - especially as it often leads onto the designed-virus stuff.
You don't understand what "Godwin" means. It is widely understood and easily googled. Have a go.
What it doesn't mean, is using someone universally recognised as very evil, as an example of someone very evil. I can't see the problem with that, so please elucidate?
You don't seem to understand anything about any of this. Gain of function research is a recognised, mainstream, practice. You seem to think it is a sort of 4chan fantasy, or so I deduce from "designed-virus stuff."
And I wasn't "blaming the US." as a matter of fact I am not blaming anyone. I was saying IF someone else adheres to the lab leak theory THEN that other person holds the less anti-Chinese of the two possible views. It is hard to see how to conduct a rational conversation with someone who gets from there, to where you are.
And, politely, my childrens' medical records are off limits.
"You don't seem to understand anything about any of this." Well, I'd argue that's an indication of your lack of perception.
"And, politely, my childrens' medical records are off limits"
And that's fair enough. But if you didn't give your kids the MMR vaccine for non-medical reasons, then you are a shit. An absolute shit who does not care for his kids. But as you do care for your kids, I'd assume that you gave them the MMR jab,
And as that's the case, why trust JFK on anything?
I don't "trust JFK" on this because he is dead, and if you mean "RFK jr" I hadn't heard of him before today. From what I have seen, he was quoted purely as relaying academically reliable sources. I won't trigger you again by referring to hitler, but if Pol Pot wrote a paper referring to Darwin on the OOS, how badly damaging would that be to the theory of ebns?
as to the link: congrats! you have googled, read and completely misunderstood probably the simplest article anywhere in wp. Well done.
You're on a political website - this website - and you haven't heard of JFK Jr? The guy who threw his hat into the ring for President a while back?
"From what I have seen, he was quoted purely as relaying academically reliable sources."
Please give examples.
This is just hopeless. he is RFK JR not JFK JR and you keep repeating the mistake. It's exactly because I have a passing interest in politics that I don't think that one Kennedy is just like another.
The example is you, less than two hours ago, dismissing a well-sourced page on the grounds that "RFK jr is involved in that site."
"A striking still-life fresco resembling a pizza has been found among the ruins of ancient Pompeii... and includes one item that looks suspiciously like a pineapple."
Did you bother to even read that article before you posted it?
"Fish fingers are still a good way to get the wary to eat fish. After Birds Eye developed fish fingers, it created the tagline “no bones, no waste, no smell, no fuss” and that still holds. So what else is in there? Nothing too odd, it seems."
Which part of 65% fish did you fail to understand?
from the article
"There’s not a lot of fish in fingers compared to a full-size fillet, but they are an easy way to have fish. The only question for Captain Birds Eye now is whether to fry or grill them."
Where does it say less than 65% fish?
Edit: I'd like to apologise Pagan. It may not say anything about 65% in the article but I've just checked the Waitrose website for Bird's Eye Cod fish fingers...
"A striking still-life fresco resembling a pizza has been found among the ruins of ancient Pompeii... and includes one item that looks suspiciously like a pineapple."
Did you bother to even read that article before you posted it?
"Fish fingers are still a good way to get the wary to eat fish. After Birds Eye developed fish fingers, it created the tagline “no bones, no waste, no smell, no fuss” and that still holds. So what else is in there? Nothing too odd, it seems."
Which part of 65% fish did you fail to understand?
from the article
"There’s not a lot of fish in fingers compared to a full-size fillet, but they are an easy way to have fish. The only question for Captain Birds Eye now is whether to fry or grill them."
Duh. Because a fair proportion of it is batter! I'm not here to defend fish fingers, which are mundane food at best, but your staunch opposition to them seems... a little weird.
"A striking still-life fresco resembling a pizza has been found among the ruins of ancient Pompeii... and includes one item that looks suspiciously like a pineapple."
Did you bother to even read that article before you posted it?
"Fish fingers are still a good way to get the wary to eat fish. After Birds Eye developed fish fingers, it created the tagline “no bones, no waste, no smell, no fuss” and that still holds. So what else is in there? Nothing too odd, it seems."
Which part of 65% fish did you fail to understand?
from the article
"There’s not a lot of fish in fingers compared to a full-size fillet, but they are an easy way to have fish. The only question for Captain Birds Eye now is whether to fry or grill them."
Where does it say less than 65% fish?
Edit: I'd like to apologise Pagan. It may not say anything about 65% in the article but I've just checked the Waitrose website for Bird's Eye Cod fish fingers...
Birds eye it says "Birds Eye’s box of 18 fish fingers uses just 58 per cent fish but keep reading the ingredients "
and here "Dunnes’ Alaskan Pollock fish fingers have 65 per cent fish fillet"
Yes, they have a coating, that's not exactly a secret.
The coating is thin and forms much less than 20% of a fishfinger. Sorry processed food is basically crap and even 58% cod is probably a large portion of stuff you wouldnt expect in a fillet of cod just like most beefburgers will contain lips, testicles etc.
Which of the ingredients is it you are objecting to?
I am saying the definition of fish is not one most would willingly eat....just like the definition of beef is wide in beefburgers which certainly arent minced steak for example but contain a lot of minced parts that you couldn't persuade people to buy
So when they say it is 100% fillet you are convinced they are lying? Rather than being concerned about the fish %?
I trust food companies not to lie rather less than I trust Liz truss to be competent frankly, you want to trust them go right ahead
Birds Eye chilli con carne had horsemeat in it instead of beef a decade or so ago, so sure these things happen and it would be foolish to trust them 100%. But equally it is kind of weird to be so convinced that they are particularly lying about fish finger ingredients rather than elsewhere in their range, probably occassionally and sporadically as things go wrong.
I dont buy processed food full stop
Being against processed food in general makes a lot more sense than being particularly against fish fingers.
But there are a lot of food processes, like cooking, curing, soaking, lacto-fermentation etc. that have come about over centuries to make food more digestible and nourishing. You can't chuck the whole lot out by having universal rule. I am obviously not including fish fingers in the 'improved by processing' category.
The fish finger cathexis in this discussion is really something. It must be part of the come down from Saturday's hysteria.
The unresolved question, of course, is whether the Wagner mob have got further down the route to Moscow if they had some 100% cod fillet, high in omega 3, wholegrain and pepper coated fish fingers with mayo in ciabatta for lunch? Perhaps the Rothschild chap/chapess know the answer to this whatif?
2 year UK gilt now at 5.24% new 15 year high, half a %age point above post mini budget peak. markets now see 70% chance of rates over 6% by end of year…
Well it is not helped by the BMA and other militant unions seeking high pay awards
Aside from the broader economic debate over links between public sector pay and inflation, does *seeking* high pay awards contribute to higher inflation? Surely it's *getting* high pay awards?
The problem is the refusal to discuss sensible awards
To be honest your Government has deliberately and determinedly decided to ride out the NHS strikes. Now this is really, really clever from the Government if they are content to see doctors and nurses leaving the UK for Australia and New Zealand or the NHS to the relative stress free havens of Lidl and Aldi.
Anyway we gave them a clap every Thursday bwhen we applauded Boris' COVID performance.
"A striking still-life fresco resembling a pizza has been found among the ruins of ancient Pompeii... and includes one item that looks suspiciously like a pineapple."
Did you bother to even read that article before you posted it?
"Fish fingers are still a good way to get the wary to eat fish. After Birds Eye developed fish fingers, it created the tagline “no bones, no waste, no smell, no fuss” and that still holds. So what else is in there? Nothing too odd, it seems."
Which part of 65% fish did you fail to understand?
from the article
"There’s not a lot of fish in fingers compared to a full-size fillet, but they are an easy way to have fish. The only question for Captain Birds Eye now is whether to fry or grill them."
Duh. Because a fair proportion of it is batter! I'm not here to defend fish fingers, which are mundane food at best, but your staunch opposition to them seems... a little weird.
"A striking still-life fresco resembling a pizza has been found among the ruins of ancient Pompeii... and includes one item that looks suspiciously like a pineapple."
Did you bother to even read that article before you posted it?
"Fish fingers are still a good way to get the wary to eat fish. After Birds Eye developed fish fingers, it created the tagline “no bones, no waste, no smell, no fuss” and that still holds. So what else is in there? Nothing too odd, it seems."
Which part of 65% fish did you fail to understand?
from the article
"There’s not a lot of fish in fingers compared to a full-size fillet, but they are an easy way to have fish. The only question for Captain Birds Eye now is whether to fry or grill them."
Where does it say less than 65% fish?
Edit: I'd like to apologise Pagan. It may not say anything about 65% in the article but I've just checked the Waitrose website for Bird's Eye Cod fish fingers...
Birds eye it says "Birds Eye’s box of 18 fish fingers uses just 58 per cent fish but keep reading the ingredients "
and here "Dunnes’ Alaskan Pollock fish fingers have 65 per cent fish fillet"
Yes, they have a coating, that's not exactly a secret.
The coating is thin and forms much less than 20% of a fishfinger. Sorry processed food is basically crap and even 58% cod is probably a large portion of stuff you wouldnt expect in a fillet of cod just like most beefburgers will contain lips, testicles etc.
Which of the ingredients is it you are objecting to?
I am saying the definition of fish is not one most would willingly eat....just like the definition of beef is wide in beefburgers which certainly arent minced steak for example but contain a lot of minced parts that you couldn't persuade people to buy
So when they say it is 100% fillet you are convinced they are lying? Rather than being concerned about the fish %?
I trust food companies not to lie rather less than I trust Liz truss to be competent frankly, you want to trust them go right ahead
Birds Eye chilli con carne had horsemeat in it instead of beef a decade or so ago, so sure these things happen and it would be foolish to trust them 100%. But equally it is kind of weird to be so convinced that they are particularly lying about fish finger ingredients rather than elsewhere in their range, probably occassionally and sporadically as things go wrong.
I dont buy processed food full stop
Being against processed food in general makes a lot more sense than being particularly against fish fingers.
But there are a lot of food processes, like cooking, curing, soaking, lacto-fermentation etc. that have come about over centuries to make food more digestible and nourishing. You can't chuck the whole lot out by having universal rule. I am obviously not including fish fingers in the 'improved by processing' category.
There is a difference however between doing it at home yourself and accepting a companies description of something as for example Cod. Cod heads are technically cod I just prefer not to eat them
Is the great PB Fish Finger hysteria in anyway related to the Brexit Fisherman hysteria where a market sector that contributes about 1% to the economy forms a major part of the arguments negotiations?
"A striking still-life fresco resembling a pizza has been found among the ruins of ancient Pompeii... and includes one item that looks suspiciously like a pineapple."
Did you bother to even read that article before you posted it?
"Fish fingers are still a good way to get the wary to eat fish. After Birds Eye developed fish fingers, it created the tagline “no bones, no waste, no smell, no fuss” and that still holds. So what else is in there? Nothing too odd, it seems."
Which part of 65% fish did you fail to understand?
from the article
"There’s not a lot of fish in fingers compared to a full-size fillet, but they are an easy way to have fish. The only question for Captain Birds Eye now is whether to fry or grill them."
Where does it say less than 65% fish?
Edit: I'd like to apologise Pagan. It may not say anything about 65% in the article but I've just checked the Waitrose website for Bird's Eye Cod fish fingers...
"A striking still-life fresco resembling a pizza has been found among the ruins of ancient Pompeii... and includes one item that looks suspiciously like a pineapple."
Did you bother to even read that article before you posted it?
"Fish fingers are still a good way to get the wary to eat fish. After Birds Eye developed fish fingers, it created the tagline “no bones, no waste, no smell, no fuss” and that still holds. So what else is in there? Nothing too odd, it seems."
Which part of 65% fish did you fail to understand?
from the article
"There’s not a lot of fish in fingers compared to a full-size fillet, but they are an easy way to have fish. The only question for Captain Birds Eye now is whether to fry or grill them."
Where does it say less than 65% fish?
Edit: I'd like to apologise Pagan. It may not say anything about 65% in the article but I've just checked the Waitrose website for Bird's Eye Cod fish fingers...
Comments
The “tell” is the vegan venison.
Now, I'm pretty LibDemsceptic, but even I think they're going to make gains. Simply, if the LD vote is largely flat on 2019, while the Conservative vote is down (say) five percentage points, they'll win a couple.
I'd say Cheltenham, Winchester, and Guilford all look highly vulnerable to them, and all have seen the LDs surge at the local level.
"Fish fingers are still a good way to get the wary to eat fish. After Birds Eye developed fish fingers, it created the tagline “no bones, no waste, no smell, no fuss” and that still holds. So what else is in there? Nothing too odd, it seems."
1) cut cod or haddock into finger sized pieces.
2) wisk a whole egg or 2 - put the fish in bowl and make sure they are well coated.
3) roll in some good, coarse, breadcrumbs. Set the rolled pieces out on a board, while you…
4) heat frying pan with a good layer of vegetable oil at the bottom - a mm or 2, not a pond
5) when it is good and hot, start frying.
6) turn after a couple of minutes. BBQ tongs are awesome for this.
from the article
"There’s not a lot of fish in fingers compared to a full-size fillet, but they are an easy way to have fish. The only question for Captain Birds Eye now is whether to fry or grill them."
But please understand my point wrt JFK Jr: he is a shit. An evil shit. This is nothing to do with politics; just to do with the 'causes' he has built his political following on, and ones you unthinkingly promote.
Please, please, please, check your sources.
So Labour's lead of 27% in the Red Wall poll just out would mean they'd win back all 40 of those seats. Their lead is currently higher than the Conservative share of the vote.
https://twitter.com/RedfieldWilton/status/1673722860387586048
Industrial accidents with dire consequences are commonplace and not really that exciting, I would not have thought. Bhopal - the Movie may exist, but it'll be a downbeat documentary.
And most importantly, lab leak is the least Chinese-blamey game in town by a country mile. US Big Science was balls deep in the gain of function nonsense, whereas wet markets is 100% the inscrutable oriental.
Edit: I'd like to apologise Pagan. It may not say anything about 65% in the article but I've just checked the Waitrose website for Bird's Eye Cod fish fingers...
Cod (FISH) (58%), Breadcrumb Coating*, Rapeseed Oil, *Breadcrumb Coating (WHEAT Flour, Water, Potato Starch, Salt, Paprika, Yeast, Turmeric)
Apols.
PB lefties and loons and persons-of-the-tiny-pecker-commminity (Aka @JosiasJessop and @kinabalu) must have an entire portfolio of questions I can lob at him over the lobster claws
Speculation mounts over potential break-up by retailer’s US owner
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2023/06/27/boots-shut-300-stores-britain/ (£££)
Another overseas "investment" in British assets ends badly.
As for 'politically impossible', Germany is subject to exactly the same external political pressures as we are (possibly more due to the EU), yet they are razing towns to dig coal mines because they refuse to offshore their economy and impoverish their people - that's the bottom line. Sadly our useless excuse for a Government doesn't have a bottom line.
As for Net Zero, I am not for abandoning it (though any elected Government should reserve the right to do so), I am for finding creative ways to meet the target (such as dressing fields with rock dust) that don't involve taking our economy back to the dark ages. And if necessary, being prepared to miss the target if it proves incompatible with economical survival. You will find this approach is very unpopular with proponents of Net Zero, who are worried that other ways of meeting the target may be found and people may be allowed to continue their 'high carbon lifestyles' - because control over peoples' lifestyles was the whole point.
Do you have kids? Did they get the MMR jab?
*Of course* lab leak is Chinese-blamey game - especially as it often leads onto the designed-virus stuff.
and here
"Dunnes’ Alaskan Pollock fish fingers have 65 per cent fish fillet"
(The modern-day Rothschild's don't interest me in the least.)
So I think the only two possibilities are very deliberate large-scale misinformation, or that some of the kind of things that are considered beyond the pale by so many people, are right.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-66031341
What it doesn't mean, is using someone universally recognised as very evil, as an example of someone very evil. I can't see the problem with that, so please elucidate?
You don't seem to understand anything about any of this. Gain of function research is a recognised, mainstream, practice. You seem to think it is a sort of 4chan fantasy, or so I deduce from "designed-virus stuff."
And I wasn't "blaming the US." as a matter of fact I am not blaming anyone. I was saying IF someone else adheres to the lab leak theory THEN that other person holds the less anti-Chinese of the two possible views. It is hard to see how to conduct a rational conversation with someone who gets from there, to where you are.
And, politely, my childrens' medical records are off limits.
As he was a Rothschild, I let him.
It was a small plane and was all one class. He was returning from a yacht race.
What about freight, and plant and farm machinery? Surely we're going to have to seriously increase our generation to satisfy that demand?
The most immediate movement we seem to have coming on generation capacity is downward: we have to 'Just Stop' burning fossil fuels
I know that we have loads more windfarms coming on stream over the next few years (if we can get the parts to finish them), but wind isn't reliable enough to be our main source of energy without a huge increase in storage capacity
I've read a lot of comments saying that having car batteries solves the problem of storage. I reckon at most it would mitigate it a little; How would people travel when the wind hadn't blown? And how much could you usefully store in cars beyond travel needs?
We need to build huge amounts of energy storage and we need to start now
Solar is productive and certainly our panels are excellent, and as far as wind is concerned investment is supported across the parties save maybe Tice and RefUK
You are not remotely realistic if you think the UK will follow Germany in coal, but then you support Truss so being unrealistic comes with the territory
You are going to have to come to terms with Starmer, PM, as it is happening and frankly to this conservative it will be a relief when he takes over what will be the ultimate hospital pass
Mine really is, I keep reading stories about how F&C now costs nearly a tenner. In my local Somerset market town it's £13.90 for medium cod.
"You don't seem to understand anything about any of this." Well, I'd argue that's an indication of your lack of perception.
"And, politely, my childrens' medical records are off limits"
And that's fair enough. But if you didn't give your kids the MMR vaccine for non-medical reasons, then you are a shit. An absolute shit who does not care for his kids. But as you do care for your kids, I'd assume that you gave them the MMR jab,
And as that's the case, why trust JFK on anything?
Ingredient Declaration
Cod (FISH) (58%)
Breadcrumb Coating*
Rapeseed Oil
*Breadcrumb Coating (WHEAT Flour, Water, Potato Starch, Salt, Paprika, Yeast, Turmeric)
Beats sword holding, I suppose...
Wind can never be economical. We can, at best, soften its negative impact on energy costs by altering the subsidy system to ensure all excess power is stored.
If you don't think a Government that is prepared to risk being tutted at globally to serve the national interest is 'realistic' you have a very low opinion of UK politics. Perhaps you are right, but I am an optimist.
JCB are going heavily into green hydrogen. And whilst this has the electric-only lobby fainting, it can may make sense for mobile machinery that requires really long duty cycles. It may only be a minor part of the solution to the environmental problem, but it may be a part.
as to the link: congrats! you have googled, read and completely misunderstood probably the simplest article anywhere in wp. Well done.
"From what I have seen, he was quoted purely as relaying academically reliable sources."
Please give examples.
Ever had chicken claws at an Asian restaurant? (Top tip: do not chew them!)
It did not say much about his judgment...
https://www.tesco.com/groceries/en-GB/products/314422959
Been a while since I was that broke, but 60/40 is not far off.
My favourite are the ones where they put "OMEGA 3" in huge letters to distract from the fact that the word "Cod" doesn't appear anywhere on the box.
Man walks into Tesco's cafe and orders a burger.
Waitress says: "Do you want anything on that?"
Man says: "Yeah, a fiver each way."
The example is you, less than two hours ago, dismissing a well-sourced page on the grounds that "RFK jr is involved in that site."
JFK jr. FFS. WTF. Bring back the button.
Anyway we gave them a clap every Thursday bwhen we applauded Boris' COVID performance.
I think we should be told...